JK 

3938 
1912 
M3 


LIBRARY 

UNIVERSITY  OF 

CALIF    PN1A 
IRVINE 


RECENT  ADMINISTRATION  IN  VIRGINIA 


SERIES  XXX  NO.  I 

JOHNS  HOPKINS  UNIVERSITY  STUDIES 

IN 

HISTORICAL  AND  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

Under  the  Direction  of  the 

Departments  of  History,  Political  Economy,  and 
Political  Science 


RECENT  ADMINISTRATION  IN 
VIRGINIA 


F.  A.  MAGRUDER,  PH.D. 

Instructor  in  Political  Science  in  Princeton  University 


BALTIMORE 

THE  JOHNS   HOPKINS  PRESS 
1912 


COPYRIGHT  1912  BY 
THE  JOHNS   HOPKINS  PRESS 


PRESS  or 


CONTENTS. 

PAGE. 

Preface ix 

I.     PUBLIC  EDUCATION. 

i.     Public  School  System  1 1 

Unsuccessful  Attempts  to  Establish 

Free  Schools  1 1 

The  Literary  Fund 12 

Establishment  of  the  Public  School 

System   15 

Organization  of  the  Public   School 

System   17 

Decentralizing  Tendencies   19 

Centralization  and  Efficiency 20 

Revival  of  Education 22 

Growth  of  the  Virginia  Public  School 

System  (Table)    25 

State  Board  of  Education 25 

Superintendent    of    Public    Instruc- 
tion     26 

Board  of  Examiners 27 

Division  Superintendents 29 

District  Trustees 35 

Teachers  35 

Consolidation  and  Transportation  . .  37 

High  Schools 38 

Compulsory  Education   40 

Text-Books   42 

Libraries 44 

Politics  and  the  Schools 46 

Finances   47 

Growth  of  Expenditures  since  1871 

(Table)    57 

Schools  for  the  Colored 57 

Growth  of  Colored  Schools  (Table)  60 

ii.     Higher  Education 60 

v 


vi  Contents. 

PAGE. 

William  and  Mary  College 60 

University  of  Virginia 62 

Virginia  Military  Institute 65 

Schools  for  the  Deaf  and  Blind. ...  67 

Virginia  Polytechnic  Institute 67 

State  Normal  Schools 69 

Other  State  Aid 73 

Discussion    74 

II.     THE  ELECTORATE  AND  ELECTIONS. 

The  Electorate 78 

Registration  82 

Elections 83 

Corrupt  Practices  Act 86 

Primary  Elections    87 

Discussion  of  the  Present  System  . .  89 

III.     CHARITIES  AND  CORRECTIONS. 

i.     State  Hospitals  for  the  Insane 95 

Growth 95 

Control  97 

Commitment    98 

Management    100 

Treatment    102 

ii.     Soldiers'  Home 103 

iii.     Penitentiary 103 

Management    103 

Conveying  of  Prisoners 105 

Living  Conditions 106 

Little  Effort  to  Reform  Inmates  ....  108 

Employment 109 

State  Farm 112 

Convict  Road  Force 112 

iv.     Reformatories   115 

Reformatories   115 

Board  of  Charities  and  Corrections. .  116 

IV.    PUBLIC  HEALTH 1 18 

Early  Health  Laws 1 18 

Board  of  Health 119 


Contents.  vii 

PAGE. 

Department  of  Public  Health 122 

V.     AGRICULTURE. 

Department  of  Agriculture 129 

Fertilizer  Inspection    130 

Inspection  of  Trees  134 

Seed  Inspection   136 

Protection  of  Domestic  Animals 136 

Immigration  137 

Experimentation  138 

Teaching  and  Demonstration 139 

Pure  Food 140 

Recapitulation  for  1910 142 

Suggestions    143 

VI.     PUBLIC  SERVICE  CORPORATIONS. 

Board  of  Public  Works 147 

Railroad  Commissioner 149 

Organization  of  the  State  Corporation  Com- 
mission    150 

Working  of  the   State   Corporation   Com- 
mission     153 

Bureau  of  Insurance 159 

Banking  Division   161 

VII.    FINANCES. 

Central  Officers 163 

Local  Officers   166 

Property  Tax 168 

Income  Tax 171 

Railroad  Tax 173 

Railroad  Exemption  from  Taxes 178 

Banks    179 

Capitation  Tax  180 

Liquor  Tax  182 

Virginia  Debt 183 

VIII.     CENTRALIZING  TENDENCIES  AND  NEEDS. 

Departments 192 

The  Governor 194 

Conclusions    199 


PREFACE. 

Since  the  Constitutional  Convention  of  1902,  and  to  no 
small  extent  as  a  result  of  the  instrument  framed  by  that 
body,  the  state  government  of  Virginia  has  rapidly  expanded 
its  administrative  functions.  It  is  the  purpose  of  this  study 
to  describe  that  expansion,  and  to  contrast  the  present 
administration  with  that  of  the  period  covered  by  the  con- 
stitution of  1869.  In  some  few  instances  the  administration 
is  traced  from  ante-bellum  days,  but  in  the  main  the  study 
covers  the  period  since  1869,  with  special  emphasis  upon  the 
present  system. 

The  kind  assistance  of  Professor  W.  W.  Willoughby  and 
the  invaluable  courtesies  extended  by  the  Virginia  State  Li- 
brary and  by  many  of  the  state  officials  are  gratefully  ac- 
knowledged. 

F.  A.  M. 


RECENT  ADMINISTRATION  IN  VIRGINIA. 


CHAPTER   I. 

PUBLIC  EDUCATION. 

I.    PUBLIC  SCHOOL  SYSTEM. 

Unsuccessful  Attempts  to  Establish  Free  Schools. — Be- 
fore the  Civil  War,  Virginia,  like  the  other  States  forming 
the  Southern  Confederacy,  was  without  a  system  of  public 
free  schools.  In  1779,  before  the  independence  of  the  State 
had  been  fully  realized,  Thomas  Jefferson  and  George 
Wythe,  revisers  of  the  colonial  laws,  had  introduced  into  the 
General  Assembly  a  bill  providing  for  an  elaborate  system 
of  education.  At  first  the  plan  was  received  with  enthu- 
siasm; but  as  the  measure  proposed  that  the  College  of 
William  and  Mary,  under  an  improved  form,  should  be  the 
university  at  the  apex  of  the  system,  and  as  that  institution 
was  under  Episcopalian  influence,  the  Dissenters  after  a 
while  began  to  apprehend  some  secret  design  of  a  preference 
for  that  sect,  and  the  measure  failed  to  pass.1 

Under  the  influence  of  Jefferson  an  act  establishing  pri- 
mary schools  passed  the  General  Assembly  in  1796.  This 
act  provided  for  the  election  of  three  "  aldermen  "  for  each 
county,  in  whom  all  supervision  was  lodged.  The  total 
expense  was  to  fall  on  the  county.  The  following  clause 
prevented  the  introduction  of  this  primary  system:  "The 
court  of  each  county  .  .  .  shall  first  determine  the  year  in 
which  the  first  election  of  said  aldermen  shall  be  made,  and 
until  they  so  determine  no  election  shall  be  made."2  The 
court,  composed  of  all  the  justices  of  the  peace,  represented 
the  larger  taxpayers  of  the  county,  and  these  were  unwill- 

1Ford,  Writings  of  Thomas  Jefferson,  Vol.  II,  p.  220,  and  Report 
of  the  Commissioner  of  Education,  1876,  p.  399. 
"Acts,  1796,  c.  I. 

ii 


12  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

ing  to  place  a  tax  upon  themselves  for  schools  to  which 
they  would  not  have  sent  their  children. 

In  1846,  following  an  enthusiastic  educational  convention 
which  had  been  held  in  Richmond  the  preceding  year,  the 
General  Assembly  passed  an  act  providing  for  "  a  free  school 
system."1  But  this  act,  like  that  of  1796,  contained  what  was 
in  fact  a  nullifying  clause:  it  required  the  assent  of  two 
thirds  of  the  electors  of  any  county  before  it  could  go  into 
effect  there.  The  insincerity  of  a  bill  which  required  a  two 
thirds  majority  was  so  apparent  that  during  the  same  ses- 
sion certain  counties  were  granted  permission  to  introduce 
public  free  schools,  if  the  majority  of  the  electors  should 
vote  affirmatively.  Though  the  plan  was  adopted  by  nine 
of  the  counties,  it  seems  to  have  survived  until  the  Civil 
War  in  Norfolk  County  only.2  Conducted  without  central 
supervision,  by  local  officers  who  received  only  nominal  pay, 
success  could  hardly  have  been  expected. 

The  Literary  Fund. — Though  the  State  failed  to  establish 
a  free  school  system,  it  had,  since  1810,  made  an  inadequate 
provision  for  poor  white  children  through  the  Literary 
Fund.3  In  February,  1810,  the  General  Assembly  enacted 
that  "all  escheats,  confiscations,  fines,  penalties,  and  for- 
feitures, and  all  rights  in  personal  property  accruing 
to  the  Commonwealth  as  derelict,  and  having  no  rightful 
proprietor,  shall  be  appropriated  to  the  encouragement 
of  learning";  and  the  auditor  was  ordered  to  open  an 
account  to  be  designated  "  The  Literary  Fund."4  By  an 
act  passed  the  next  year  the  management  and  purpose 
of  the  fund  were  more  definitely  provided  for.  The 
governor,  lieutenant-governor,  treasurer,  attorney-general, 
and  president  of  the  court  of  appeals  were  made  a  cor- 
porate body  known  as  "President  and  Directors  of  the 

1Acts,  1846,  c.  40-42. 

1  See  Virginia  School  Report,  1885,  Part  III. 

'In  Norfolk,  public  free  schools  were  established  in  1850  by  an 
ordinance  of  the  city  council;  and  by  1858  four  schools  were  sup- 
ported by  a  $4.00  capitation  tax.  Petersburg  had  also  established 
several  small  free  schools. 

*Acts,  1809-10,  c.  14. 


Public  Education.  13 

Literary  Fund."  This  board  was  to  invest  the  funds  and 
to  dispose  of  the  interest  as  directed  by  the  General  Assem- 
bly. The  fund  was  "  to  provide  a  school  or  schools  for  the 
education  of  the  poor  in  each  and  every  county  of  the  Com- 
monwealth."1 By  an  act  of  1816  a  debt  paid  to  Virginia 
by  the  Federal  Government  was  added  to  the  small  fund 
which  had  accumulated.  This  payment  was  a  loan  for  the 
War  of  1812,  and  amounted  to  $1,210,550. 

In  1818  the  first  appropriation  was  made  from  the 
interest  of  the  fund.  It  consisted  of  $45,000  annually  for 
the  education  of  white  children  and  $15,000  annually  for 
the  founding  and  sustaining  of  the  University  of  Virginia. 
The  $15,000  for  the  University  continued  unchanged  in 
amount  until  the  Civil  War;  but,  as  the  Literary  Fund  in- 
creased, the  annual  appropriation  for  the  education  of  white 
children  gradually  increased  until  1861,  when  it  reached 
$i6o,53O.2  This  fund  was  apportioned  among  the  counties 
by  the  president  and  directors  of  the  Literary  Fund,  and 
was  dispensed,  in  each  county,  by  an  optional  number  of 
commissioners  appointed  by  the  county  court.  The  money 
was  apportioned  by  the  counties  according  to  white  popu- 
lation. The  commissioner  of  a  locality  would  appoint  as 
many  "  indigent "  pupils  as  the  appropriation  would  allow, 
and  for  these  he  would  pay  a  private  school-teacher  a  defi- 
nite sum  for  every  day  the  pupils  were  in  actual  attendance. 

In  1821  the  General  Assembly  resolved  that,  "  When  the 
annual  income  of  the  Literary  Fund  shall  exceed  $60,000 
the  surplus  shall  be  given  to  such  colleges,  academies  and 
intermediate  schools,  as  the  general  assembly  may  direct."8 
An  act  of  February,  1829,  allowed  10  per  cent,  of  the  allot- 
ment to  be  used  for  building  school-houses,  provided  the 
locality  should  pay  three  fifths  of  the  cost  of  erection.  This 
act  also  provided  that  $100  of  the  fund  might  be  used  for 
employing  a  teacher  if  the  patrons  raised  a  like  amount. 

1  Acts,  1810,  c.  8. 

"Documents,  1859-60,  Doc.  No.  7. 

'Acts,  1821,  c.  2. 


14  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

In  this  event  the  school  was  to  be  free  to  all.  In  1836  the 
fund  exceeded  $60,000.  Then,  instead  of  carrying  out  the 
resolution  to  give  the  surplus  directly  to  colleges,  academies, 
and  intermediate  schools,  the  decision  was  made  that  it 
should  be  given  to  the  commissioners  for  primary  schools, 
allowing  them  to  apply  the  surplus  in  any  county  to  acad- 
emies or  colleges.1  Only  seventeen  academies  received  the 
slightest  benefit.2  Afterwards,  by  an  act  of  March  8,  1842, 
an  annuity  of  $1,500  was  allowed  the  Virginia  Military  In- 
stitute from  this  fund. 

In  1851  the  second  auditor  reported  that  out  of  65,370 
poor  white  children  only  31,486  were  actually  schooled,  and 
these  were  taught  an  average  of  54  days  a  year  at  an 
average  cost  of  4  cents  a  day.3  The  new  constitution  of  the 
same  year  provided  that  at  least  one  half  of  the  capitation 
tax  should  go  to  the  fund,4  and  in  the  session  of  1852-1853 
the  General  Assembly  appropriated  the  whole  capitation  tax 
to  the  fund.5  Before  the  Civil  War  the  greatest  amount  of 
money  devoted  to  primary  schools  by  the  State  was  spent 
in  1859,  when  the  average  yearly  attendance  among  54,232 
poor  white  children  was  59  days  at  a  cost  varying  from  2 
to  6  cents  a  day  per  child.  The  total  amount  spent  was 
$i6o,530.6 

The  Constitutional  Convention  of  1861  appropriated  the 
income  of  the  fund  to  the  military  defense  of  the  State,  but 
in  1824  the  General  Assembly  had  already  appropriated 
from  the  principal  of  the  fund  $180,000  in  the  form  of  sus- 
pended debts  to  the  University  of  Virginia.  The  same  was 
done  in  1850  for  Richmond  Medical  College  and  Emory  and 
Henry  College  ;  $25,000  for  the  former,  and  $18,000  for  the 
latter.  Between  1810  and  1871  $440,837  was  lost  by  invest- 
ments. Hence  in  1871,  when  the  first  annual  report  of  the 


1836,  c.  4. 

2  Southern  Literary  Messenger,  Vol.  VII,  p.  631. 

3  Report  of  Social  Auditor,  1851,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  33. 
*  Constitution,  1850,  Art.  IV,  Sec.  24. 

5  Acts,  1852-53,  c.  26. 

'  Documents,  1859-60,  Doc.  No.  7. 


Public  Education.  15 

state  superintendent  of  public  instruction  was  issued,  the 
available  funds  amounted  to  $i,596,o69.1 

On  October  i,  1910,  the  fund  was  $2,308,300,  of  which 
about  $1,800,000  was  invested  in  3  per  cent,  state  bonds,  and 
about  $500,000  in  loans  for  public  school  buildings  bearing 
4  or  5  per  cent,  interest.  The  fund  is  accumulating  to  the 
extent  of  about  $80,000  a  year,  derived  principally  from 
state  fines.  Until  the  present  decade  the  accumulation  was 
about  $30,000  annually ;  and  in  fact  in  some  years  it  fell  off 
to  almost  nothing.  The  fines  were  not  well  collected,  even 
when  reported  to  the  state  auditor;  but  now  those  that  are 
reported  are  properly  collected,  the  loss  being  due  to  local 
magistrates  who  fail  to  report  fines  imposed.  The  bulk  of 
fines  are  imposed  in  cities;  and  if  the  judge  of  the  police 
court  believes  that  the  accused  will  pay  his  fine,  he  is  apt 
to  be  charged  with  the  violation  of  a  city  ordinance ;  but  if 
he  has  to  serve  his  term,  he  is  likely  to  be  charged  with  a 
violation  of  the  laws  of  the  State  in  order  that  his  jail  board 
may  be  paid  by  the  State. 

Establishment  of  the  Public  School  System. — The  Con- 
stitutional Convention  of  1868  was  composed  of  one  hun- 
dred members,  of  whom  two  thirds  represented  the  radical 
party.  The  radicals  were  twenty-four  negroes,  fourteen 
white  Virginians,  thirteen  New  Yorkers,  one  member  each 
from  Pennsylvania,  Ohio,  Maine,  Vermont,  Connecticut, 
South  Carolina,  Maryland,  and  the  District  of  Columbia; 
two  from  England;  and  one  each  from  Ireland,  Scotland, 
Nova  Scotia,  and  Canada.2  To  this  unwelcome  cosmo- 
politan assembly  Virginia  owes  the  constitutional  provision 
for  the  establishment  of  the  first  state-wide  free  school 
system. 

The  next  General  Assembly  was  controlled  by  the  coali- 
tion of  the  conservative  Republicans  and  the  conciliatory 
Democrats.  Faithful  to  their  constitutional  pledge,  they 

1  School  Report,  1871,  p.  198. 

3  Eckenrode,  "  The  Political  History  of  Virginia  during  the  Recon- 
struction," in  Johns  Hopkins  University  Studies  in  Historical  and 
Political  Science,  Ser.  XXII,  Nos.  6-8,  p.  87,  note. 


1 6  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

appointed  Rev.  W.  H.  Ruffner  state  superintendent  of  public 
instruction,  and  directed  him  to  draft  a  plan  fulfilling  the 
constitutional  provision.1  There  were  fifteen  applicants  for 
the  position,  but  Dr.  Ruffner2  had  the  support  of  Robert  E. 
Lee,  and  after  receiving  the  caucus  nomination  his  election 
by  the  General  Assembly  was  unanimous.  Within  thirty 
days  his  plan  was  drafted,  and  with  a  few  modifications  was 
made  law.  Two  years  later  Superintendent  Ruffner  wrote: 
"Acting  under  a  constitution  whose  provisions  for  educa- 
tion they  did  not  fully  approve,  her  [Virginia's]  legislators, 
at  their  first  meeting,  enacted  laws  in  strict  conformity  with 
its  requirements.  Entertaining  in  their  own  minds  serious 
doubts  of  the  undertaking,  and  meeting  with  opposition 
from  others,  they  nevertheless  determined  not  merely  to 
comply  with  the  constitution  as  a  matter  of  form,  but  to 
make  the  experiment  in  good  faith." 

The  Virginia  Educational  Journal  for  May,  1870,  ex- 
pressed the  views  of  many  Virginia  people:  "If  any  real 
good  is  to  come  out  of  the  proposed  trial  of  public  schools 
in  Virginia,  we  are  perhaps  fortunate  in  having  as  the  di- 
rector thereof  one  who  seems  to  be  so  enthusiastic  in  praise 
of  the  system  generally.  The  people  of  this  State  have  con- 
sented, though,  it  shall  never  be  forgotten,  under  the  per- 
suasive influence  of  the  bayonets  of  the  United  States  Gov- 
ernment, to  make  trial  of  a  mode  of  education,  against  which 
their  judgment  and  observation  have  for  years  revolted. 
Having  pledged,  however,  the  faith  of  the  State  to  this  work, 

1  School  Report,  1872,  p.  15. 

*  William  Henry  Ruffner,  the  "Horace  Mann  of  the  South,"  was 
born  in  1824  at  Lexington,  Virginia,  where  his  father  was  president 
of  Washington  College.  There  he  received  the  degree  of  bachelor 
of  arts  at  the  age  of  eighteen,  when  he  delivered  an  oration  on 
"  The  Power  of  Knowledge."  Three  years  later  he  received  the 
degree  of  master  of  arts.  He  became  a  leader  in  Christian  and  tem- 
perance work;  studied  theology  at  Hampden  Sydney  and  at  Prince- 
ton; was  chaplain  at  the  University  of  Virginia;  married  in  1850; 
was  pastor  of  the  Seventh  Presbyterian  Church,  Philadelphia.  On 
account  of  ill  health  from  overwork  he  retired  to  a  Virginia  farm. 
He  was  opposed  to  slavery,  though  he  was  never  disloyal  to  his 
State.  From  1870  to  1882  he  was  superintendent  of  public  instruc- 
tion ;  he  was  superintendent  of  Virginia's  first  State  Normal  School 
from  1884  to  1886;  he  retired  near  Lexington,  and  died  in  1908. 


Public  Education.  17 

no  good  would  result  from  a  discussion  of  the  merits  of 
such  a  system.  We  must  swallow  the  dose  now."1 

When  the  public  free  school  system  was  established  by  the 
constitution  of  1869,  there  were  three  sources  of  opposi- 
tion; first,  among  the  well-to-do,  for  even  to  those  in 
moderate  circumstances  the  public  free  school  meant  char- 
ity, because  the  Literary  Fund  which  had  distributed  char- 
ity to  "indigent"  children  was  associated  with  a  common 
school  system;  second,  there  was  a  strong  sentiment  in 
favor  of  church  schools;  third,  it  was  felt  that  for  700,000 
whites  to  educate  themselves  and  500,000  colored  was  a 
Herculean  task  in  view  of  the  prostrate  economic  condition 
of  the  State.  Beside  the  lack  of  individual  capital  to  repair 
the  losses  of  war,  the  State  had  not  yet  adjusted  a  $45,000,- 
ooo  ante-bellum  debt,  bearing  6  per  cent,  interest. 

Organization  of  the  Public  School  System. — The  public 
free  school  system  went  into  effect  in  the  fall  of  1870. 
It  was  modeled  upon  tried  systems ;  and  instead  of  the  decen- 
tralized district  system  which  had  already  proved  unsatis- 
factory in  New  England,  a  centralized  system  was,  from 
necessity,  at  once  inaugurated.  The  administrators  were  a 
state  board  of  education,  a  superintendent  of  public  instruc- 
tion, division  superintendents,  and  district  trustees. 

The  state  board  of  education  was  composed  of  the  gov- 
ernor, attorney-general,  and  superintendent  of  public  instruc- 
tion. It  had  all  the  powers  hitherto  vested  in  the  board  of 
the  Literary  Fund,  such  as  the  investment  and  distribution 
of  funds ;  but  the  second  auditor,  a  special  officer  created  in 
1823  to  take  charge  of  the  state  debt  and  special  funds,  con- 
tinued a  custodian  of  the  fund.  The  duties  of  the  board 
were  the  making  of  by-laws,  the  appointing  of  division 
superintendents  and  trustees  with  the  consent  of  the  Senate, 
the  hearing  of  appeals  from  superintendents,  and  many  other 
duties  usually  belonging  to  such  a  board.2  The  state  super- 
intendent of  public  instruction  was  elected  every  four  years 

1  Educational  Journal  of  Virginia,  Vol.  I,  p.  223. 
"Acts,  1869^-70,  c.  259. 


1 8  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

by  a  joint  ballot  of  the  General  Assembly.1  To  the  division 
superintendents  he  was  an  intermediary  court  and  a  col- 
lector of  reports;  to  the  boards  he  was  an  apportioner  of 
funds  which  were  distributed  according  to  the  number  of 
children  between  five  and  twenty-one  years  of  age.  In  brief, 
he  was  both  the  pivot  and  the  motive  power  of  the  system.2 

The  division  superintendents,  of  county  or  city,  were 
elected  by  the  state  board,  with  a  salary  not  exceeding  $350 
a  year.  The  duties  included  supervision  of  district  boards, 
collection  of  reports,  examination  of  teachers,  and  visiting 
of  schools.  The  questions  for  examinations  were  prepared 
by  the  state  board,  but  in  practice  the  division  superintend- 
ents determined  their  standard  for  grading  the  papers  and, 
in  fact,  certificated  whom  they  pleased. 

The  district  board  of  trustees  was  a  corporate  body  of 
three  members  elected  for  three  years  by  the  state  board. 
The  district  coincided  with  the  township  or  "magisterial 
district,"  and  the  trustees  received,  from  the  district  funds, 
a  sum  not  exceeding  $2  a  day  for  time  actually  spent  in  the 
performance  of  their  duties.  These  were  to  provide  build- 
ings, select  teachers,  furnish  books  for  indigent  children, 
take  the  census,  submit  questions  of  district  school  taxes 
to  the  electors,  suspend  pupils,  and  perform  a  number  of 
minor  duties.3 

Such  was  the  original  organization;  but  the  next  year 
the  district  trustees  were  organized  into  county  school 
boards, — corporate  bodies,  composed  of  the  county  superin- 
tendent and  all  the  district  trustees  of  the  county.*  The 
board  met  annually  to  examine  all  reports  concerning  school 
funds,  including  the  books  of  the  county  treasurer,  and  to 
recommend  an  appropriation  for  the  following  year  to  the 
county  supervisors  who  determined  the  county  and  the  dis- 
trict school  rate.5 

'Acts,  1869-70,  c.  15. 

3  Acts,  1869-70,  c.  259. 

3  Acts,  1869-70,  c.  259. 

*Acts,  1871-72,  c.  107. 

'  Acts,  1871-72,  c.  348. 


Public  Education.  19 

Decentralising  Tendencies. — Although  Dr.  Ruffner,  state 
superintendent  of  public  instruction  from  1870  to  1882,  was 
an  enthusiastic  supporter  of  a  public  school  system,  he  was 
an  advocate  of  a  decentralized  system.  In  1874  he  wrote 
an  article  deploring  centralization,  under  the  title :  "  State 
Uniformity  of  text  books;  Tending  to  Despotism,  Cor- 
ruption and  Intellectual  Death."  The  article  ended 
triumphantly  with  the  sentence :  "  Vive  la  Republique." 

The  constitution  provided  for  uniform  text-books,  but  the 
superintendent  oddly  construed  it  to  mean  uniform  in  any 
one  school  or  locality,  so  he  prepared  at  first  a  double,  after- 
wards a  multiple  list  from  which  the  local  school  officers 
selected.  In  1875  he  had  a  law  passed  providing  for  sub- 
districts  in  any  county  whose  school  board  desired  them. 
This  gave  the  patrons  of  a  single  school  almost  absolute 
control  of  their  school.1  Few  counties  tried  this  township 
meeting  idea  which  was  so  foreign  to  Virginia.  Today  this 
law  is  dead  letter,  though  the  patrons  often  supplement  the 
salary  of  teachers  by  local  subscriptions. 

Two  years  later  the  county  trustee  electoral  board,  com- 
posed of  the  county  superintendent  of  schools,  the  county 
judge,  and  the  commonwealth-attorney,  was  created  to  elect 
and  dismiss  district  trustees,  and  it  thus  took  over  a  func- 
tion hitherto  performed  by  the  state  board.  This  board  also 
heard  appeals  from  the  district  boards  of  trustees  when 
any  five  patrons  were  dissatisfied  with  the  decision  of  a 
district  board  of  trustees.2  Excepting  a  political  interrup- 
tion from  1882  to  1886,  trustees  have  always  been  elected 
by  this  local  board ;  but  since  1902,  when  the  office  of  county 
judge  was  dropped,  the  circuit  judge  has  appointed  a  non- 
official  as  third  member  of  the  board.  Dr.  Ruffner  also 
advocated  the  appointment  of  division  superintendents  by  a 
special  board.  Fortunately  this  was  never  done.  Should 
the  election  of  the  division  superintendent  be  taken  from  the 
state  board  the  latter  would  be  left  powerless.  State  elec- 
torates have  never  justified  local  school  autonomy. 

1  Acts,  1874-75,  c.  81 ;  1877-78,  c.  161. 
1  Acts,  1876-77,  c.  12. 


2O  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

The  original  act  for  the  establishment  of  a  public  school 
system  applied  to  cities  as  well  as  counties,  except  in  so 
far  as  the  charters  and  ordinances  of  cities  and  towns  other- 
wise provided,  and  these  exceptions  were  insignificant.1 
The  following  year  it  was  provided  that  incorporated  towns 
of  more  than  five  hundred  inhabitants  might,  at  the  option 
of  the  town  council,  constitute  a  separate  school  district  with 
financial  control  separate  from  county  supervision  or  the 
county  treasurer.2  Cities  with  a  population  of  more  than 
ten  thousand  might  have  a  superintendent,  if  the  remaining 
part  of  the  county  had  a  population  of  fifteen  thousand.  But 
in  these  smaller  cities  the  approval  of  the  state  board  was 
required.  The  city  council  divided  the  city  into  districts; 
if  wards  existed,  each  ward  became  a  district.  According 
to  the  intent  of  the  law,  the  council  was  obliged  to  furnish 
the  amount  of  school  funds  asked  for  by  the  city  school 
board,  provided  it  did  not  exceed  double  the  state  appro- 
priation or  necessitate  a  school  tax  of  more  than  three  mills.8 
Interpretations  of  this  law,  however,  deprived  the  city  school 
board  of  this  power. 

Centralisation  and  Efficiency. — As  we  have  seen,  the  sys- 
tem of  education  provided  for  in  1870  was  centralized  to  an 
extreme  degree  in  the  General  Assembly  and  a  political  state 
board.  From  1870  to  1882  it  gradually  became  less  cen- 
tralized. From  1882  to  1902  no  noteworthy  changes  were 
made  in  the  system ;  but,  as  we  shall  now  see,  the  new  con- 
stitution of  1902  has  again  centralized  the  administration  in 
the  state  board  of  education.  The  centralization  in  1870 
was  a  matter  of  expediency,  a  means  of  forcing  upon  the 
people  a  system  which  the  majority  of  influential  whites  did 
not  favor;  the  centralization  of  1902  is  a  matter  of  effi- 
ciency, a  means  of  improving  a  system  which  practically  all 
acknowledge  to  be  a  prime  necessity  for  the  progress  of  the 
State. 


17,  c.  233. 
*  Acts,  1869-70,  c.  259. 
'Acts,  1870-71,  c.  276. 


Public  Education.  21 

This  centralization  of  power  in  the  state  board  of  educa- 
tion was  brought  about  by  Article  IX,  Section  132,  of  the 
constitution  of  1902  which  provides  that:  "It  [the  state 
board]  shall  have  authority  to  make  all  needful  rules  and 
regulations  for  the  management  and  conduct  of  the  schools, 
which,  when  published  and  distributed,  shall  have  the  force 
and  effect  of  laiv  [italics  mine],  subject  to  the  authority 
of  the  general  assembly  to  revise,  amend,  or  repeal  the 
same."  No  state  board  in  the  union  has  stronger  powers. 
As  an  example  of  this  power,  we  find  that  in  1908  the 
General  Assembly  enacted  a  law1  regulating  in  detail  the 
construction  of  public  school  buildings.  A  state  board  of 
inspectors  for  these  buildings  was  to  accept  no  plans  which 
did  not  fulfill  all  the  requirements  of  the  act;  but  the  ac- 
companying bill  providing  for  a  state  board  of  inspectors 
for  public  school  buildings  failed  to  pass.  This  made  the 
law  of  no  effect.  In  1910  the  General  Assembly  again  re- 
fused to  create  such  a  board.  The  state  board  of  education, 
however,  by  regulation  has  provided  that  the  building  act 
of  1908  shall  be  enforced  by  the  division  superintendents, 
and  that  no  school-house  shall  be  built  without  the  approval 
of  one  of  these  officers.  As  the  division  superintendents 
are  dependent  upon  the  state  board  of  education  for  re- 
election, the  state  board  has  as  complete  control  over  the 
architecture  of  schoolhouses  as  if  the  General  Assembly  had 
provided  the  inspectors. 

Another  example  of  the  power  of  the  state  board  is  a 
regulation  which  gives  a  division  superintendent  in  a  city 
"exclusive  authority  to  assign  to  their  respective  positions 
all  teachers  and  principals  employed  by  the  school  board  of 
trustees,  and  to  assign  them  at  his  discretion,"  notwith- 
standing the  fact  that  the  General  Assembly  had  provided2 
that  teachers  should  be  employed  and  dismissed  by  the 
school  board  of  trustees.  The  state  board  of  education  also 
continues  to  administer  the  Literary  Funds,  and  has  been 
given  full  discretion  and  power  in  selecting  text-books 

1  Acts,  1908,  c.  187. 
'Acts,  1906,  c.  292. 


22  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

instead  of  being  restricted  to  a  uniform  list  as  it  was  by  the 
constitution  .of  1869  ;x  and  it  may  enter  into  contracts  with 
publishers.2 

At  the  same  time  that  power  was  concentrated  in  the 
"board,  the  personnel  of  the  board  was  changed  so  as  to 
prevent  the  probability  of  graft  or  of  ill-considered  rules. 
It  is  now  composed  of  eight  members:  the  governor,  the 
^attorney-general,  and  the  superintendent  of  public  instruc- 
tion, officers  elected  quadrennially  by  the  people;  three  ex- 
perienced educators  elected  for  the  same  term  by  the  Senate 
from  a  list  of  six  eligibles,  consisting  of  one  from  each  of 
the  faculties,  and  nominated  by  the  respective  boards  of 
visitors  of  six  specified  state  schools;  and  two  division 
superintendents,  one  from  a  county  and  the  other  from  a 
city,  who  are  selected  for  two  years  by  the  preceding  six 
members.  The  last  two  members  cannot  participate  in  the 
appointment  of  any  public  school  official. 

The  election  of  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction 
was  transferred  from  the  General  Assembly  to  the  people, 
and  the  superintendent  instead  of  the  governor  was  made 
ex-officio  president  of  the  board.  The  debates  of  the  Con- 
stitutional Convention  show  that  three  alternatives  were 
considered;  first,  the  General  Assembly  might  continue  to 
elect;  second,  the  governor  might  appoint;  third,  the  state 
board  might  select.  The  objection  to  the  first  was  the 
certainty  of  political  consideration;  to  the  second,  the 
temptation  Of  a  governor  to  select  the  educator  who  had 
proved  to  be  his  best  political  retainer;  to  the  third,  the 
fact  that  the  superintendent  himself  has  direct  or  indirect 
part  in  selecting  five  members  of  the  board. 

Revival  of  Education. — The  general  increased  interest  in 
public  schools  in  Virginia  during  the  past  few  years  has 
come  about  in  the  following  manner.  By  1902,  when  the 
Constitutional  Convention  framed  the  plan  for  the  new 
board  of  education,  the  generation  which  had  opposed  the 

1  Constitution,  1869,  Art.  VIII,  Sec.  6. 

2  Acts,  1908,  c.  292. 


Public  Education.  23 

system  of  1869,  or  in  fact  any  system  of  public  free  schools, 
had  largely  passed  away.  The  system,  though  inefficiently 
administered,  had  become  a  reality.  Therefore,  the  com- 
mittee on  schools  of  the  Constitutional  Convention  strove 
to  remove  the  system  as  far  as  possible  from  party  politics 
and  to  make  it  efficient.  The  former  was  accomplished 
by  adding  five  non-political  or  educational  members  to 
the  three  so-called  political  members  of  the  state  board ; 
the  latter,  by  giving  the  board  power  to  make  laws  govern- 
ing school  matters,  subject  only  to  the  veto  of  the  next 
General  Assembly.  Also,  the  Constitutional  Convention 
provided  for  increased  revenues.  Since  1902  the  state 
revenues  have  doubled. 

While  the  Constitutional  Convention  of  1869  was  in 
session  the  Peabody  Fund  came  to  assist  in  the  establish- 
ment of  public  schools  in  Virginia.  In  1902  the  General 
Education  Board  came  to  revive  education.  The  latter 
began  its  work  with  Mr.  Robert  G.  Ogden  of  New  York  as 
its  president.  He  was  an  enthusiastic  advocate  of  educa- 
tion for  the  South.  Previous  to  this  the  Southern  Educa- 
tion Board,  a  body  of  educators  who  met  annually  for 
debate,  had  been  organized,  but  it  would  have  languished 
for  funds  had  not  the  General  Education  Board  come  to  its 
rescue.  Mr.  Rockefeller  pledged  $100,000  per  annum  for 
ten  years  to  the  General  Education  Board.1  In  1902  and 
1903  Hon.  Harry  Saint  George  Tucker  and  Dr.  Robert 
Frazer  devoted  eighteen  months  to  educational  field-work 
in  Virginia  under  the  auspices  of  the  Southern  Education 
Board.2 

The  Virginia  Teachers'  Association  was  revived  between 
1901  and  1906  under  the  presidency  of  R.  C.  Stearnes,  now 


*This  was  the  beginning  of  the  Rockefeller  Fund  of  the  General 
Education  Board,  which  on  June  30.  1911,  amounted  to  $32,246,377. 
The  professor  of  secondary  education  at  the  University  of  Virginia 
is  paid  from  this  fund.  It  is  his  duty  to  visit  and  inspect  high 
schools,  and  to  encourage  high  school  development. 

2  Under  the  auspices  of  the  Southern  Education  Board,  Dr.  C.  W. 
Dabney,  of  Nashville,  Tennessee,  issued  Southern  Education  Notes, 
a  bi-weekly  which  was  widely  circulated  throughout  Virginia. 


24  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

secretary  to  the  state  board  of  education.  In  the  spring  of 
1904  the  Virginia  Cooperative  Education  Commission,  to 
cooperate  with  the  General  Southern  Education  Board,  was 
organized  with  Governor  Montague  as  temporary  chairman 
and  Dr.  S.  C.  Mitchell  as  permanent  chairman.  The  com- 
mission was  to  conduct  an  educational  conference  semi- 
annually,  and  its  platform  was  as  follows: 

1.  Nine  months'  schooling  for  every  child. 

2.  High    schools    within    reasonable    distance    of    every 
child. 

3.  Well-trained  teachers. 

4.  Agricultural  and  industrial  training. 

5.  Efficient  supervision. 

6.  Promotion  of  libraries. 

7.  Schools  for  the  defective  and  dependent. 

8.  Citizens'  education  associations  in  every  county  and 
city. 

At  the  next  conference  of  this  commission,  which  met 
in  Norfolk,  December,  1904,  Professor  Ormond  Stone,  of 
the  University  of  Virginia,  offered  a  resolution  to  the  effect 
that  Governor  Montague  and  President  Alderman,  of  the 
University,  make  a  thorough  tour  of  the  State  in  May, 
1905,  in  the  interest  of  better  education.  Other  educators 
and  public-spirited  professional  men  were  invited  to  enlist. 
During  the  intervening  six  months  Professor  Bruce  R. 
Payne,  then  of  William  and  Mary  College,  as  chairman 
of  the  committee  on  publications,  kept  the  newspapers  of 
the  State  filled  with  educational  literature.  In  this  so-called 
May  Campaign  one  hundred  of  the  ablest  speakers  of  the 
State  delivered  three  hundred  addresses  in  ninety-four 
counties  at  one  hundred  and  eight  meetings;  two  hundred 
thousand  pages  of  educational  literature  were  issued;  and 
fifty  citizens'  school  associations  were  formed. 

In  the  fall  of  1905,  upon  the  invitation  of  the  Coopera- 
tive Education  Commission,  another  meeting  of  superin- 
tendents and  others  engaged  in  educational  work  was  held 
in  Lynchburg.  The  following  autumn  the  Virginia"  Educa- 


Public  Education. 


tional  Conference  met,  and  it  has  met  every  autumn  since 
that  time.  The  conference  is  composed  of  the  Conference 
of  Division  Superintendents,  organized  in  the  eighties;  the 
State  Teachers'  Association,  organized  in  1901 ;  the  Co- 
operative Education  Association,  organized  in  1904;  and 
the  School  Trustees  Association,  organized  in  1906. 

In  1906  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction,  J.  D. 
Eggleston,  the  only  first-class  superintendent  since  1882, 
came  into  office  at  the  same  time  as  Governor  Swanson,  who 
had  himself,  when  a  young  man,  taught  a  country  school. 
The  new  school  board  created  the  board  of  five  examiners 
and  inspectors.  These  men  at  once  entered  with  enthusiasm 
upon  their  work  as  field  agents.  Some  of  the  results  are 
shown  graphically  by  the  following  table:1 

GROWTH  OF  THE  VIRGINIA  PUBLIC  SCHOOL  SYSTEM. 


Year. 

Enumera- 
tion.    (Be- 
tween 5  and 
21  years.) 

Enrollment. 

Daily 
attendance. 

Percentage 
of  attend- 
ance to 
enumera- 
tion. 

Percentage 
of  attend- 
ance to  en- 
rollment. 

Months 
taught. 

Teach- 
ers em- 
ployed. 

1871 

44I,O2I 

131,088 

75.722 

18.4 

57-7 

4.66 

3*014 

1875 

482,789 

184,486 

103.927 

21-3 

56.3 

5-59 

4,262 

i860 

555.807 

220,730 

128,404 

23  I 

58.1 

5-64 

4.873 

1885 

610,271 

303,343 

176,469 

28.9 

58.1 

5-92 

6,693 

1890 

652,045 

342,260 

198,290 

3°-4 

57  9 

5-9i 

7.523 

I895 

665,533 

355.986 

202,530 

30.4 

56.8 

595 

8,292 

IQOO 

691,312 

370,595 

216,464 

31-3 

58.4 

6.00 

8,954 

1905 

580,6182 

361,772 

215,205 

37.02 

59-4 

6.40 

9,972 

1910 

6I5-3792 

402,109 

259,394 

42.1* 

64-5 

7.04    10,443 

State  Board  of  Education. — From  1870  until  1902,  a 
period  when  the  board  was  composed  of  two  political 
ex-officio  members  and  one  elected  by  a  political  assembly, 
great  progress  could  not  have  been  expected ;  and  it  was 
not  made.  The  addition  of  five  educators  to  the  board  is 
one  of  the  best  results  of  the  Constitutional  Convention  of 
1902.  Membership  on  the  board  has  become  a  great  honor 
because  able,  true  men  have  been  selected  for  it.  In  the 

1  The  table  on  page  57,  entitled  "  Growth  of  Expenditures,"  shows 
this  development  even  more  strikingly. 
*  Between  7  and  20  years. 


26  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

selection  of  division  superintendents  the  non-political  mem- 
bers have  few  friends  among  the  applicants  to  whom  they 
feel  under  obligations,  hence  their  votes  are  cast  more 
impartially. 

In  1910,  when  two  frank,  straightforward  members  of 
the  board  were  superseded,  it  was  believed  by  many  that 
political  attorneys  for  book  corporations,  friends  of  defeated 
applicants  for  the  division  superintendency,  and  persons 
actuated  by  political  factional  animus  were  the  causes. 
However,  there  is  no  reason  to  believe  that  their  successors 
will  be  any  more  open  to  improper  influences:  in  fact,  the 
system  which  restricts  the  membership  of  the  board  to  mem- 
bers of  the  faculties  of  state  schools  is  a  reasonable  guar- 
antee of  an  efficient  personnel. 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. — From  1870  until 
1905  the  General  Assembly  elected  only  one  noteworthy 
superintendent  of  public  instruction ;  and  it  did  not  elect  him 
originally,  but  twice  reconfirmed  him.  The  reference  is  to 
Superintendent  Ruffner  (1870-1882),  who  was  practically 
named  by  General  Robert  E.  Lee.  It  is  generally  believed 
that  only  one  superintendent  has  profited  from  direct  graft, 
but  no  investigation  was  made.  This  man  is  quoted  as 
having  said  that  he  had  been  accused  of  many  things,  but 
never  of  having  been  a  fool.  It  is  told  of  another  lovable 
superintendent  that,  after  dozing  off  several  times  in  a  board 
meeting,  he  excused  himself  on  the  ground  that,  anyhow,  the 
other  members  knew  more  about  school  matters  than  he  did. 

The  present  superintendent,  J.  D.  Eggleston,  the  first  one 
popularly  elected,  is  the  man  for  the  place.  The  General 
Assembly,  in  all  probability,  would  have  elected  Mr.  Eggle- 
ston's  opponent,  who  had  been  clerk  in  the  department  of 
education  and  had  made  friends  among  the  influential  legis- 
lators of  the  State.  Mr.  Eggleston,  who  had  been  for 
several  years  a  division  superintendent  in  North  Carolina, 
was  not  in  touch  with  those  in  authority,  and  it  is  probable 
that  he  would  not  have  been  elected  by  the  General  As- 
sembly. But,  having  to  "carry"  the  Democratic  primary, 


Public  Education.  27 

he  had  an  opportunity  to  place  himself  before  the  people  and 
to  criticize  the  inefficiency  of  the  department.  Th:s  campaign 
brought  information  to  him  that  there  was  graft  in  the  de- 
partment. An  investigation  centered  this  graft  upon  his 
opponent,  and  Mr.  Eggleston's  election  was  assured.  In 
1909  Mr.  Eggleston  was  reelected  by  the  people  without 
Democratic  competition.  He  spends  two  thirds  of  his  time 
in  doing  field-work,  while  the  clerk  of  the  state  board  of 
education  takes  charge  of  the  voluminous  office-work.  The 
clerk  is  practically  the  assistant  superintendent  of  public  in- 
struction; and  he  too  is  making  flying  trips  to  educational 
rallies  every  few  evenings. 

Board  of  Examiners. — In  the  summer  of  1905  the  state 
board  of  education  created  a  "board  of  examiners  and  in- 
spectors "  as  directed  by  acts  of  the  General  Assemblies  of 
1903  and  I9O4.1  The  duties  of  this  board  were  to  make 
out  all  examination  questions  and  grade  all  papers,  and  to 
act  as  lieutenants  of  the  superintendent  of  public  instruct:on 
for  the  general  betterment  of  the  public  school  system. 
Five  young  enthusiastic  and  energetic  men  were  selected,  and 
they  took  up  their  duties  that  fall  with  practically  the  unani- 
mous approval  of  the  educators  of  the  State. 

Formerly  there  had  been  in  the  State  more  than  a  Hundred 
standards  for  teachers.  The  examination  questions  had 
been  prepared  by  the  state  board  of  education,  but  the 
division  superintendents  had  conducted  the  examinations 
and  had  graded  the  papers.  Much  partiality  had  been 
shown,  not  by  failing  to  pass  those  who  deserved  to  pass, 
but  bv  granting  permits  after  a  sham  oral  examination  or  no 
examination  at  all.  In  fact,  the  salaries  were  so  extremely 
low  and  competent  teachers  so  scarce  that  the  superin- 
tendents would  set  low  standards  in  order  to  supply  their 
schools.  It  was  difficult  for  an  efficient  teacher  to  receive 
a  salary  commensurate  with  his  or  her  worth  when  other 
teachers  held  certificates  which  indicated  the  same  prepara- 
tion. When  the  first  examination  questions  were  sent  by 

,  1902-03-04,  c.  509;  1904,  c.  101. 


28  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

the  examiners  to  the  division  superintendents,  sealed,  and 
the  answers  were  returned,  sixty  per  cent,  of  those  examined 
failed  to  pass.  This  proper  standard,  however,  could  not  be 
maintained,  and  a  number  of  "  emergency  certificates  "  had 
to  be  granted.  But  this  exhibition  of  the  deficiency  of 
public  school  teachers  had  its  influence  in  the  establishment 
of  three  additional  state  normal  schools. 

When  the  next  General  Assembly  met  in  1906,  there  was 
a  sentiment  hostile  to  the  new  board  because  of  its  cost 
(about  $15,000  per  annum),  because  central  inspectors  were 
interfering  with  local  inaction,  and  because  many  deficient 
teachers  had  lost  their  certificates  or  feared  to  lose  them. 
The  House  of  Delegates  passed  a  joint  resolution,  with  only 
one  dissenting  vote,  to  abolish  the  board  of  examiners  and 
inspectors.  In  the  senate  committee  nearly  all  of  the  college 
presidents  and  other  educators  of  the  State  pleaded  for 
the  retention  of  the  board.  Mrs.  Dashiell  and  Mrs.  Mun- 
ford,  two  public-spirited  ladies  of  Richmond,  made  telling 
speeches  for  its  retention.  The  senate  committee  reported 
the  resolution  with  an  adverse  recommendation,  and  it  did 
not  pass.  Between  1906  and  1908  the  name  "inspector" 
was  dropped,  the  body  being  called  merely  a  board  of 
examiners.  In  the  next  session  of  the  General  Assembly 
(1908)  concurrent  resolutions  were  offered  for  the  same 
purpose,  but  a  vote  was  prevented.  Between  1908  and  1910 
the  board  of  education  made  one  member  of  the  board  of 
examiners  a  "  supervisor  of  rural  schools,"  but  in  1910  a 
joint  resolution  again  appeared,  and  was  defeated  in  the 
Senate  after  a  hard  fight  on  the  part  of  the  educators  of  the 
State.  In  the  summer  of  1911  the  state  board  of  education 
abolished  the  board  of  examiners,  and  in  the  future,  exami- 
nation papers  will  be  examined  by  assistants  in  the  office  of 
the  superintendent  of  public  instruction.  Field-work  will 
be  continued  by  the  supervisor  of  rural  schools,  the  super- 
visor of  colored  schools,  and  two  agents  paid  by  the  Peabody 
Fund;  by  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction;  from 
time  to  time  by  the  secretary  of  the  board  of  education,  and 


Public  Education.  29 

the  editor  of  the  Virginia  School  Journal ;  and  perhaps  by 
others  employed  by  the  state  board.  It  is  a  policy  of  the 
General  Assembly  to  grant  conditional  aid  to  schools,  and 
unless  this  aid  is  followed  by  the  appointment  of  supervisors 
or  inspectors  this  wise  plan  will  miscarry.  Many  educators 
believe  that  the  field  agents  should  be  given  districts,  that 
they  may  become  acquainted  with  a  particular  section  of  the 
state;  but  the  prevailing  opinion  is  that  they  should  be 
under  the  close  supervision  of  the  superintendent  of  public 
instruction. 

Division  Superintendents. — In  1870,  when  the  General 
Assembly  was  drafting  a  law  for  a  public  school  system,  the 
House  of  Delegates  thought  that  division  superintendents 
should  serve  for  several  counties,  especially  where  the  coun- 
ties were  small  in  area  or  population.  The  Senate  favored 
a  superintendent  for  each  county  or  city,  and  this  view  pre- 
vailed.1 The  same  General  Assembly  provided  that  the 
salary  of  superintendents  should  be  paid  by  the  State,  and 
should  be  based  on  population.  It  was  not  to  exceed  $15 
for  each  thousand  of  population,  and  $350  was  to  be  the 
maximum  salary.  The  next  year  the  city  councils  were 
allowed  to  supplement  the  salaries  of  division  superintend- 
ents.2 In  1874  the  "  Bourbons  "  manifested  a  disposition  to 
abolish  the  office.3  What  arguments  they  used  the  author 
does  not  know. 

In  1877  the  General  Assembly  increased  the  salary  from 
$15  a  thousand  of  population  to  $30  a  thousand  for  the  first 
ten  thousand,  and  made  $200  the  minimum  salary;  yet  a 
county  was  not  allowed  to  supplement  the  state  salary.  In 
1908  the  salary  paid  by  the  State  was  increased  from  $30  to 
$40  for  the  first  ten  thousand  of  population,  with  $25  addi- 
tional for  each  thousand  between  ten  and  thirty  thousand, 
and  $15  additional  for  each  thousand  above  thirty  thousand; 
and  the  county  was  for  the  first  time  permitted  to  supple- 
ment the  superintendent's  state  salary.4  With  this  increase 

1  Richmond  Whig,  June  29,  1870. 
'Acts,  1869-70,  c.  259;  1870,  c.  308. 
"Richmond  Whig,  February  19,  1874. 
*Acts,  1908,  c.  292. 


30  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

the  average  salary  of  county  superintendents  was  only  $514 
per  annum ;  and  of  the  one  hundred  county  superintendents- 
only  eight  received  as  much  as  $900  per  annum.1 

Thus  it  is  seen  that,  since  the  superintendency  of  Dr. 
Ruffner  (1870-1882)  no  real  progress  has  been  made  in 
the  amount  of  salary,  and  therefore  in  the  personnel,  of 
division  superintendents  for  counties.  Considering  the  in- 
creased average  standard  of  living  in  Virginia  as  the  State 
gradually  recovered  from  the  necessary  economy  caused  by 
the  losses  of  war,  and  considering  the  recent  universal  de- 
preciation of  money  values,  the  superintendents  were  re- 
munerated better  in  1878  than  in  1908. 

At  this  stage  the  General  Assembly  passed  a  law  which 
allowed  the  state  board  of  education  to  combine  into  larger 
divisions  such  counties  as  would  not  raise  the  salaries  of  its 
superintendents  to  a  minimum  of  $9oo.2  The  constitution 
of  1902  bestowed  upon  the  board  the  power  of  combining 
counties ;  but  knowing  the  opposition  which  would  develop 
against  this  departure  from  a  custom  forty  years  old,  the 
board  prudently  obtained  the  support  of  the  General  As- 
sembly. Hence,  at  one  stroke,  by  means  of  threats  to- 
combine  counties  under  one  superintendent,  the  county 
superintendents'  salaries  were  raised  from  an  average  of 
$514  to  an  average  of  $980  per  annum.3  In  doing  this, 
however,  twenty-eight  counties,  nearly  all  small  ones,*  and' 
two  cities  were  combined  into  fifteen  divisions,  thereby 
reducing  the  number  of  county  superintendents  from  one 
hundred  to  eighty-seven. 

1  Virginia  Journal  of  Education,  June,  1909,  p.  23. 

z  Acts,  1908,  c.  292. 

*  Virginia  Journal  of  Education,  June,  1909,  p.  23.  These  salaries 
were  distributed  as  follows :  ten  received  $1500  or  more ;  twenty- 
eight  received  more  than  $1000  and  less  than  $1500;  twenty-six 
received  more  than  $900  and  less  than  $1000;  twenty-three  received 
less  than  $900.  Since  1909  many  salaries  have  been  further  increased. 

*In  Virginia  thirty-three  of  the  one  hundred  counties  have  (1910) 
less  than  10,000  inhabitants.  Excepting  West  Virginia,  in  all  the 
remaining  North  Atlantic  States  there  are  only  four  counties  with 
as  few  as  10,000  population.  It  would  very  likely  be  wise  to  com- 
bine these  small  East  Virginia  counties  for  all  administrative 
purposes. 


Public  Education.  3 1 

i 

The  guarantee  of  better  salaries  brought  forward  a  num- 
ber of  superior  men  in  1909  when  the  superintendents  were 
elected  for  the  accustomed  four-year  term.1  Many  of  the 
old  incumbents  had  been  in  office  for  years,  and  were  of 
estimable  moral  character;  a  number  were  Civil  War 
veterans;  and  others  were  fortified  by  family  and  church 
relations.  To  replace  these  by  young,  more  energetic,  and 
more  progressive  men  required  a  real  interest  in  the  better- 
ment of  schools.  The  state  board  met  and  elected  those 
who  had  few  or  no  competitors,  and  adjourned  for  a  week. 
During  this  week  the  local  politicians  were  busy.  One 
would  plead  for  his  candidate  because  it  would  bring  party 
harmony  in  a  certain  county;  another  would  show  that 
the  dismissal  of  a  war  veteran  would  mean  the  loss  of  the 
county  to  the  party ;  and  where  it  was  proposed  to  import  a 
superintendent  or  to  combine  two  counties  a  storm  in- 
variably arose. 

When  the  second  meeting  convened,  the  board  knew  that 
it  must  "  make  progress  slowly " ;  that  totally  to  disregard 
influential  and,  in  many  cases,  clean  party  men  would  mean 
a  set-back  to  education  by  the  next  General  Assembly,  which 
was  to  meet  the  following  winter.  In  many  cases  a  com- 
promise was  made.  In  one  case  the  election  was  on  con- 
dition that  the  superintendent  get  an  office  assistant,  the 
office  work  having  been  unsatisfactorily  performed;  in 
another,  that  a  certain  habit  be  discontinued;  in  another, 
that  the  one  elected  resign  in  two  years  if  not  giving  satis- 
faction; in  another,  one  who  was  a  good  administrator  but 
knew  no  pedagogy  agreed  to  employ  an  assistant  to  look 
after  the  pedagogical  side;  and  another  pledged  himself  to 
keep  out  of  politics,  having  been  too  aggressive  in  support  of 
the  minority  faction.  In  several  cases  members  of  the 
board  acceded  against  their  better  judgment  where  a  fellow- 
member  wished  to  save  a  close  personal  friend.  In  several 
cases  inefficients  were  retained  for  another  four  years  be- 

1  Previous  to  this  there  had  been  little  competition.  In  1901  sixty- 
five  places  were  uncontested  and  eighty-one  were  filled  by  reap- 
pointment  (Richmond  Times,  May  15,  1901). 


32  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia.' 

cause  it  was  thought  heartless  to  remove  one  who  had  made 
school  work  a  part  of  his  very  life. 

Among  the  hundred  and  three  superintendents  chosen, 
fifty  were  college  graduates ;  about  twenty  more  had  at- 
tended college;  and  about  thirty  had  never  been  in  college. 
Of  the  seventeen  superintendents  above  sixty  years  of  age 
only  four  were  college  graduates.  Of  the  forty-two  above 
fifty,  nineteen  had  never  been  to  college.  Of  the  forty- 
two  under  forty,  all  but  four  had  attended  college ;  but  eight 
of  the  thirty-eight  who  had  attended  college  were  not  gradu- 
ates. Sixty-seven  of  the  superintendents  had  taught  school 
more  or  less;  seven  were  farmers;  six,  lawyers;  and  four, 
politicians.  Of  the  superintendents  in  office  in  1910  about 
fifty  have  no  other  occupation,  which  is  more  than  twice  as 
many  of  this  class  as  ever  before;  more  than  three-fourths 
make  it  their  primary  occupation.  Though  data  are  not  avail- 
able for  a  detailed  comparison  with  former  superintendents, 
the  present  personnel  is  beyond  comparison  superior  to  any 
former  personnel,  but  yet  is  far  from  the  ideal.  A  suffi- 
cient number  of  educated,  progressive,  energetic  superin- 
tendents will  not  be  obtained  until  the  minimum  salary  is 
$1,500. 

To  some  this  proposed  increase  in  salary  may  sound  ex- 
travagant. But  when  we  consider  that  the  salary  of  a  rural 
mail  carrier,  who  needs  only  an  elementary  school  education, 
is  $1,000,  it  is  ludicrous  to  expect  efficient  division  superin- 
tendents at  that  figure,  about  that  sum  being  now  the  aver- 
age salary  of  county  superintendents.  When  the  matter  is 
viewed  in  another  way,  we  find  that  the  superintendents  now 
do  not  spend  on  an  average  of  more  than  two  thirds  of  their 
time  in  school  work.  If  the  salary  were  $1,500,  with  the 
condition  that  the  incumbent  engage  in  no  other  business,  the 
cost  of  service  would  be  no  more  than  at  present,  but  the 
service  would  be  much  better.  Half  of  the  time  of  a 
competent  man  is  not  worth  half  so  much  as  his  whole  time. 
A  superintendent  should  have  his  undivided  thought  on  his 
work.  He  should  be  able  to  attend  state  and  national  educa- 


Public  Education.  33 

tional  conferences,  and  to  inspect  the  work  of  other  States. 
The  law  making  $1,500  the  minimum  salary  could  allow  the 
state  board  of  education  to  combine  counties  not  paying 
that  amount.  With  this  arrangement  a  first-class  superin- 
tendent could  afford  to  keep  a  stenographer  who  could  do 
the  multifarious  routine  work,  such  as  making  out  reports, 
thereby  allowing  him  to  devote  his  entire  time  to  visiting 
schools,  planning  rallies,  and  organizing  extension  work. 

In  1909  the  state  board  attempted  for  the  first  time  to 
transfer  superintendents  from  one  county  to  another.  The 
move  met  with  such  general  opposition  that  it  was  successful 
in  only  six  cases,  all  of  which,  however,  have  since  proved 
the  wisdom  of  the  board.  In  fact,  the  school  board  of 
Alexandria  County,  which  had  four  local  candidates,  peti- 
tioned for  an  experienced  school  man,  promising  to  raise 
the  salary  from  $240  to  $1,200.  The  board  sent  the  prin- 
cipal of  the  Danville  school,  whose  salary  had  been  $1,500. 
At  the  end  of  one  year  the  Alexandria  County  Board  in- 
creased his  salary  as  superintendent  to  $1,800  and  office 
rent. 

In  February,  1910,  before  the  result  of  these  few  transfers 
could  be  determined,  the  House  of  Delegates  passed  a  bill 
by  a  vote  of  70  to  18  providing  that  only  a  citizen  and  a 
qualified  voter  of  a  division  might  be  elected  superintendent.1 
In  the  Senate  the  bill  was  reported  from  the  finance  com- 
mittee by  Senator  Keezel,  with  an  adverse  recommendation, 
and  it  did  not  pass.  It  is  interesting  to  speculate  how  this 
bill  would  have  been  reported  had  not  Senator  Keezel  be- 
come intimately  acquainted  with  the  plans  of  the  state  board 
of  education  the  preceding  summer.  The  superintendent 
from  Senator  Keezel's  county  had  been  practically  defeated 
for  reelection  because  his  efficiency  had  been  impaired  by 
age,  though  once  he  had  been  one  of  the  best  superintend- 
ents in  the  State.  Senator  Keezel,  possibly  the  most  in- 
fluential member  of  the  Senate,  appeared  before  the  board  in 
behalf  of  this  veteran  superintendent,  who  was  also  a 

1  House  Bill  85. 
3 


34  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

veteran  soldier.  On  that  occasion  he  is  said  to  have  used 
his  influence  against  importing  a  superintendent  into  his 
county.  The  senator  was  successful.  Had  he  not  been 
heard,  would  the  bill  have  been  reported  adversely?  This 
well  illustrates  a  practical  difficulty  constantly  facing  the 
state  board;  and  the  people  of  the  State  need  to  have 
patience  if  the  board  seems  to  "  make  progress  slowly."1 

Many  counties  feel  that  the  importation  of  an  outsider  is 
a  reflection  upon  themselves.  But  when  it  is  considered  that 
a  first-class  county  superintendent  should  have  the  adminis- 
trative ability  of  a  college  president  and  the  pedagogical 
knowledge  of  a  professor  of  pedagogy,  it  would  certainly  be 
a  surprising  coincidence  if  such  men  could  be  found  dis- 
tributed as  the  Virginia  counties  are  distributed.  Nowhere 
else  has  administration  been  so  successful  as  in  Germany; 
and  there  even  a  mayor  (burgermeister)  of  a  city  is  called 
from  a  small  city  to  a  larger  one,  when  he  has  succeeded  in 
the  small  city.  If  a  young  man  knows  that  success  in  a 
small  county  will  place  him  in  line  for  the  superintendency 
of  a  larger  and  wealthier  county,  he  will  give  his  best  to  the 
smaller  county  that  he  may  compete  for  the  superintendency 
of  a  larger.  The  word  "compete"  is  used  advisedly,  for 
the  custom  of  promoting  officials  by  transferring  is  competi- 
tion; the  custom  of  confining  one  to  his  own  county  is 
monopoly  of  the  worst  sort. 

Since  1871  the  city  councils  of  the  larger  cities  have  sup- 
plemented the  salaries  paid  the  superintendents  by  the  State, 
and  in  1910  the  average  salaries  of  superintendents  in  cities 
of  more  than  10,000  inhabitants  was  $1,853;  the  maximum 
was  $2,850,  the  minimum,  $1,200.  Cities  of  less  than  10,- 
ooo  inhabitants  are  in  practice  either  annexed  to  a  county  or 
superintended  by  the  principal  of  the  high  school. 

An  important  amendment  to  the  superintendents'  salary 
laws,  enacted  in  1910,  allowed  county  or  city  school  boards 
to  supplement  the  salaries  of  superintendents  from  local 

1  This  speculation  is  no  reflection  upon  Senator  Keezel.    His  ser- 
vice to  the  State  is  universally  appreciated. 


Public  Education.  35 

funds.  The  county  supervisors  are  notoriously  adverse  to 
raising  salaries.  This  amendment  further  provides  that  the 
county  supervisors  or  the  city  council  may  not  change  a 
superintendent's  salary  during  the  term  for  which  he  is 
elected,  though  the  school  board  may.1  This  is  an  excellent 
provision.  Supervisors  or  councilmen,  for  retrenchment  or 
for  political  reasons,  may  not  injure  the  school  system,  but 
the  school  board  is  free  to  reward  a  deserving  superintend- 
ent. And  there  is  little  danger  that  the  school  board  will  be 
extravagant  in  its  rewards. 

District  Trustees. — Each  of  the  five  hundred  and  eleven 
school  districts  of  the  State  has  a  board  of  three  trustees. 
The  county  trustee  electoral  boards  annually  elect  one 
trustee  for  each  district  of  their  respective  counties  for  a 
term  of  three  years;  these  trustees  serve  without  pay, 
excepting  the  clerks  of  the  district  boards,  who,  according 
to  law,  "  may  be  allowed,  out  of  the  district  fund,  an  amount 
not  exceeding  three  dollars  for  each  teacher."  The  trustee- 
ship in  Virginia  has  never  been  of  sufficient  honor  to  attract 
a  great  number  of  progressive,  educated  men,  and  for  this 
reason  the  need  of  well-paid  division  superintendents  is  felt 
the  more.  Some  of  the  progressive  councils  of  small  towns 
have  overcome  the  difficulty  by  paying  the  chairman  of  the 
school  board  a  sum  in  excess  of  the  "  three  dollars  for  each 
teacher."  For  instance,  Woodstock,  a  town  of  fourteen 
hundred  inhabitants,  has  wonderfully  improved  its  public 
schools  by  paying  the  clerk  of  its  school  board  $100  annually. 
In  this  case  the  clerk  is  both  efficient  and  interested.  Of 
course,  in  this  plan,  as  in  any  other  plan  where  the  incumbent 
devotes  only  a  portion  of  his  time  to  the  work,  there  is 
danger  of  the  clerkship's  becoming  a  sinecure. 

Teachers. — Although  the  public  school  system  was  un- 
popular in  Virginia  when  it  was  founded  in  1870,  a  great 
many  cultured  men  and  women  became  public  school  teach- 
ers from  necessity.  But  as  prosperity  slowly  returned,  and 
as  teachers'  salaries  did  not  increase  proportionately,  this 

,  1910,  c.  108. 


Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 


class  of  young  people  were  attracted  to  more  remunerative 
professions  or  vocations.  Certificates  were  easy  to  obtain, 
and  until  1906  trustees  were  not  prohibited  from  employing 
relatives.  In  1909,  after  certification  had  been  made  uni- 
form by  the  board  of  examiners,  the  10,124  outstanding 
certificates  were  distributed  as  follows:1 


White. 

Colored. 

Total. 

Collegiate  

47  ^ 

26 

409 

Professi  onal  

617 

157 

774 

Special    

185 

IO 

105 

First  grade  

^,670 

Q46 

4,616 

Second  grade  

1,532 

316 

1,868 

Third  grade     

32i; 

215 

S4.O 

Emergency  

956 

676 

»,632 

From  the  above  it  can  be  seen  that  of  more  than  10,000 
teachers  only  499  held  collegiate  certificates  and  only  774 
held  professional  certificates.  This  inferior  preparation  was 
noted  by  the  state  board  of  education,  and  the  General 
Assembly  of  that  year  provided  for  the  establishment  of 
three  new  normal  schools  for  whites.  Two  of  these  are 
now  in  operation,  one  at  Harrisonburg  and  one  at  Fred- 
ericksburg.  The  third  will  open  at  Radford,  probably  in 
the  fall  of  1912.  A  second  normal  school  for  the  colored 
is  much  needed.  In  1870  practically  all  of  the  colored 
schools  were  taught  by  white  teachers.  Today  practically 
all  of  the  colored  schools  are  taught  by  colored  teachers; 
and  of  the  2,366  colored  teachers  only  183  have  collegiate 
or  professional  certificates,  while  676  are  teaching  on 
emergency  certificates  which  are  practically  no  certificates 
at  all.  Moreover,  even  with  these  normal  schools  the  need 
is  not  solved.  Unless  the  State  uses  its  school  funds  as 
conditional  aid  to  the  localities  and  thereby  forces  up  the 
salaries  of  professionally  certificated  teachers  to  a  level  with 
those  paid  in  other  states,  these  teachers  educated  by  Vir- 
ginia will  flow  out  as  the  state  cadets  from  the  Virginia 
Military  Institute  have  been  doing  for  years.  Most  of  the 

Report  of  Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction,  1908-09,  p.  438. 


Public  Education.  37 

states   bordering   on    Virginia   pay    their   teachers   higher 
salaries. 

In  1909  the  average  annual  salary  for  teachers,  classi- 
fied according  to  the  character  of  the  certificate,  was  as 
follows  :l 

White.  Colored. 

Collegiate    $596  $198 

Professional   450  246 

First   grade    272  221 

Second   grade    190  155 

Third   grade    147  135 

Emergency    147  1 1 1 

Consolidation  and  Transportation. — Until  the  recent  re- 
vival of  education  in  Virginia  one-room  schools  continued 
to  multiply.  Since  1905  much  success  has  been  attained  in 
consolidating  rural  schools  into  buildings  with  two,  three, 
four,  or  more  rooms.  To  facilitate  this  consolidation  free 
transportation  is  being  supplied  in  many  localities.  In  1905 
nineteen  wagons  were  used  to  haul  pupils;  in  1910  one 
hundred  and  seventy-one  were  used.  These  are  wagons  of 
all  types,  the  best  being  a  four-horse  "  kid  car  "  which  hauls 
fifty  children.  In  some  instances  where  a  consolidation 
places  several  families  an  unreasonable  distance  from  the 
school  a  patron  is  paid  to  haul  his  own  and  his  neighbors' 
children.  Where  the  tax  rate  is  not  sufficient  for  public 
transportation  and  the  pupils  ride  or  drive  individually,  the 
attendance  is  apt  to  fall  off  in  the  spring ;  but  when  sufficient 
interest  is  aroused  to  bring  about  consolidation,  the  patrons 
are  realizing  that  it  is  cheaper  to  pay  taxes  for  a  two-horse 
team  than  to  send  individually  ten  or  twenty  teams. 

Augusta  County  has  had  more  experience  with  trans- 
portation than  any  other  county,  having  run  from  fifteen  to 
twenty  wagons  for  five  years.  During  this  period  the  num- 
ber of  school-houses  has  been  reduced  by  26  and  the  number 
of  teachers  by  7;  and  though  the  school  population  is  less 
than  it  was  five  years  ago,  the  enrollment  and  daily  attend- 
ance are  much  greater,  and  the  number  studying  higher 

x  School  Report,  1908-09. 


38  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

branches  has  increased  from  140  to  300.  The  monthly  cost 
of  running  a  wagon  an  average  of  three  miles  is  $32.50. 
The  daily  cost  per  pupil  is  7  cents. 

High  Schools. — It  was  clearly  recognized  in  1906  that 
the  University  of  Virginia  and  the  colleges  could  not  fulfill 
their  entire  purpose  until  the  wide  gap  between  the  graded 
school  and  the  college  should  be  filled.  There  were  in  that 
year  only  ten  four-year  public  free  high  schools  in  the  State, 
though  there  were  44  so-called  high  schools.  From  1906 
until  1910,  as  a  result  of  state  conditional  aid  and  propa- 
gandism  by  the  state  department  of  education,  the  number 
of  four-year  public  free  high  schools  has  increased  from 
10  to  83.  The  number  of  teachers  has  increased  from  146 
to  837;  of  these  537  devote  their  entire  time  to  teaching 
in  the  high  schools,  while  300  teach  for  a  part  of  the  time 
in  the  grades.1 

In  1908  the  General  Assembly  provided  for  the  support, 
by  the  State,  of  a  department  of  agriculture  and  domestic 
economy  in  one  high  school  in  each  congressional  district.2 
The  idea  was  twofold;  first,  by  granting  the  $3,000  per 
annum,  the  district  was  compelled  to  provide  a  new,  suitable 
building  and  a  sufficient  corps  of  teachers  for  the  grades; 
second,  the  school  was  intended  as  an  example  to  neighbor- 
ing districts.  These  schools  are  equipped  with  a  tract  of 
land,  thirteen  acres  being  the  average  amount,  a  small  stable, 
a  team,  and  in  some  cases  a  small  amount  of  thoroughbred 
stock.  In  some  the  principal  works  for  a  while  each  day 
with  the  pupils  in  the  field;  in  others,  the  work  is  done  by 
hired  labor,  the  principal  simply  demonstrating  to  the  pupils. 
The  more  earnest  principals  remain  at  the  school  during  the 
summer  to  look  after  the  demonstration  plots.  At  various 
times  the  patrons  are  invited  to  attend  lectures  and  demon- 
strations, the  fathers  in  agriculture,  the  mothers  in  practical 
cooking  and  other  household  work. 

The  conception  of  these   schools   is   excellent,   and   the 

1  Payne,  Five  Years  of  High  School  Progress  in  Virginia. 
'  Acts,  1908,  c.  284. 


Public  Education.  39 

experiment  should  become  a  permanent  but  improved  sys- 
tem. First,  the  agricultural  departments  need  to  be  brought 
under  the -supervision  of  the  state  agricultural  college  at 
Blacksburg.  Second,  instead  of  supporting  the  entire  high 
school  and  in  some  cases  a  part  of  the  graded  school,  the 
fund  should  be  conditioned  upon  its  use  for  the  agricultural 
and  domestic  science  departments.  To  enforce  this  latter 
condition  there  should  be  a  high  school  visitor.  Practically 
all  of  the  rural  high  schools  of  the  State  are  receiving  con- 
ditional state  aid  (and  most,  if  not  all,  of  the  state  gifts  to 
education  should  be  conditional),  and  it  is  a  lax  business 
policy  not  to  furnish  the  state  superintendent  of  public  in- 
struction with  a  lieutenant  to  enforce  the  conditions  attached 
to  gifts  of  the  General  Assembly.  This  visitor  could  carry 
many  valuable  ideas  from  a  high  school  in  one  part  of  the 
State  to  a  high  school  in  another.  Still  better,  he  could 
bring  in  ideas  from  other  States,  for  he  should  be  a  specialist 
and  informed  as  to  progress  in  matters  relating  to  high 
schools. 

This  same  suggestion  applies  to  the  twenty-four  high 
school  normal  training  departments  established  by  an  act  of 
I9O8.1  The  clerk  of  the  state  board  of  education  visited 
these  departments  in  1911,  but  he  is  too  busy  to  visit  sys- 
tematically. The  normal  teachers  of  these  departments  train 
any  high  school  pupil  desiring  the  course,  and  in  the  spring 
conduct  special  classes*  for  country  school  teachers.  Some 
of  the  more  enthusiastic  and  energetic  teachers  also  visit 
surrounding  schools  during  certain  days  of  the  week,  where 
they  do  model  teaching  for  half  a  day  at  each  school. 

When  Superintendent  Eggleston  assumed  office,  he  men- 
tioned the  need  of  "  forty  league  boots "  for  the  Virginia 
educational  system.  For  the  past  four  years  she  has  been 
wearing  them ;  but  the  following  comparison  will  show  that 
she  must  continue  to  wear  them:  "As  the  total  population 
and  the  school  population  of  Wisconsin  are  only  a  little 
more  than  that  of  Virginia,  a  comparison  of  the  high  school 

,  1908,  c.  67. 


4O  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

facilities  of  the  two  states  furnishes  the  best  statement  of 
what  Virginia  should  approach  in  this  respect.  The  chief 
difference  consists  in  the  fact  that  the  resources  of  Wis- 
consin are  adequate  to  her  educational  needs  and  those  of 
Virginia  under  the  present  system  of  taxation  are  not. 
Nevertheless  in  industrial,  social,  political  and  other  intel- 
lectual enterprises,  the  Virginian  must  compete  with  the 
citizen  of  Wisconsin,  so  that  it  behooves  Virginia  to  recog- 
nize the  standard  to  be  attained  as  rapidly  as  her  funds 
will  admit." 

"  The  school  year  of  1908-09  for  Wisconsin  is  here  com- 
pared with  that  of  1909-10  of  Virginia : 

Number  of  four-year  high  schools  in  Wisconsin,  261. 

Number  of  four-year  high  schools  in  Virginia,  83. 

Number  of  high  school  teachers  in  the  four-year  high  schools 

of  Wisconsin,  1,377. 
Number  of  high  school  teachers  in  the  four-year  high  schools 

of  Virginia,  341. 
Total  number  of  teachers  in  all  grades  of  high  schools  of 

Virginia  (1909-10),  837. 
Total  enrollment  in  four-year  high  schools  of  Wisconsin, 

30,110. 
Total   enrollment   in   four-year   high   schools   of   Virginia, 

6,968. 
Total  enrollment  in  all  grades  of  high  schools  of  Virginia, 

(1909-10),    I2,4OO."1 

Compulsory  Education. — Attempted  legislation  on  com- 
pulsory education  has  always  been  thwarted  by  delegates 
from  the  "black  belt"  of  the  State.  In  the  Constitutional 
Convention  of  1902  the  committee  on  schools  reported  a 
section  favoring  compulsory  education;  but  when  amended 
by  its  opponents  it  was  far  worse  than  if  no  mention  of  the 
subject  had  been  made.  Many  of  its  advocates  preferred 
eliminating  the  section,  thereby  leaving  the  General  As- 
sembly free  to  legislate  as  it  should  see  fit,  while  others  sug- 

1  Payne,  Five  Years  of  High  School  Progress  in  Virginia. 


Public  Education.  41 

gested  that  the  courts  might  not  uphold  such  a  law  unless 
specifically  allowed  by  the  constitution.  The  resulting 
provision  was  as  follows:  "The  general  assembly  may,  in 
its  discretion,  provide  for  compulsory  education  of  children 
between  the  ages  of  eight  and  twelve  years,  except  such  as 
are  weak  in  body  or  mind,  or  can  read  and  write,  or  are 
attending  private  schools,  or  are  excused  for  cause  by  the 
district  trustees."1 

Practically,  this  provision  is  a  prohibition  of  compulsory 
education.  On  its  face  it  seems  to  allow  the  General  Assem- 
bly to  compel  children  to  attend  until  they  learn  to  read 
and  write — an  extremely  low  standard;  but  even  this  may 
be  ignored  in  any  locality  where  the  local  trustees  are 
adverse  to  the  principle,  by  excusing  children  on  a  fictitious 
ground.  For  example,  all  negro  children  may  be  excused 
on  the  ground  that  their  parents  are  unable  to  support  them. 

The  General  Assembly  in  1908  passed  a  local  option  law 
applying  to  counties,  cities,  and  towns.  This  law  permits 
the  localities  to  compel  attendance  for  twelve  weeks  in  any 
one  year.  In  1910  the  county  of  Allegheny,  which  has  a 
very  small  negro  population,  voted  in  favor  of  compul- 
sory education.  Rockingham  County,  including  Harrison- 
burg,  followed,  as  did  the  city  of  Lynchburg  with  a  large 
negro  population.  Some  counties  claim  that  they  are  too 
poor  to  educate  those  who  voluntarily  attend.  In  north- 
ern and  western  Virginia  this  economic  argument  certainly 
cannot  be  advanced.  The.  resources  are  excellent  and  the 
negro  population  is  small.  In  the  whole  State  about  35  per 
cent,  of  enrolled  pupils  are  absent  from  school.  This  does 
not  reduce  expense ;  therefore  it  represents  a  direct  loss  of 
approximately  35  per  cent,  of  $4,000,000  annually  spent  on 
public  schools,  or  $1,200,000.  Enforced  compulsory  educa- 
tion would  prevent  a  large  part  of  this  loss.  Of  course  the 
injury  done  the  pupils  as  a  result  of  irregular  attendance  is 
far  more  important  than  the  money  loss. 

A  great  stimulus  to  education  would  result  from  distribut- 

1  Constitution,  1902,  Art.  IX,  Sec.  138. 


42  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

ing  state  funds  according  to  actual  attendance  instead  of 
according  to  school  population  between  the  ages  of  seven  and 
twenty  years.  This  change,  however,  would  require  a  con- 
stitutional amendment.1  Children  under  fourteen  years  of 
age  are  not  allowed  to  work  in  factories  or  stores.  Cer- 
tainly having  them  in  school  is  preferable  to  having  them 
idle  as  well  as  ignorant. 

Text-Books. — Free  text-books  have  never  been  furnished 
by  the  State,  but  the  local  school  boards  have  always  fur- 
nished books  to  needy  children.2  The  interest  has  centered 
around  the  selection  of  text-books.  Though  the  constitu- 
tion of  1869  said  that  the  state  board  "  shall  provide  for 
the  uniformity  of  text  books,"  this  was  construed  to  mean 
uniform  within  each  school ;  and  accordingly  the  state  board 
issued  a  double  list  from  which  local  boards  were  allowed 
to  select.  In  1874  a  triple  list  was  issued;  in  1878  a  multiple 
list,  from  which  the  county  and  city  boards  could  select; 
and  in  1882  each  division  superintendent  was  directed  to 
summon  from  three  to  five  teachers  who,  with  himself, 
should  recommend  to  the  county  or  city  board  suitable  books 
from  .the  state  multiple  list.  In  1888  a  single  list  was  pre- 
scribed by  the  state  board  under  the  influence  of  Super- 
intendent Massey;  but  the  localities  were  not  required  to 
adopt  the  single  list  at  once, — that  is,  as  long  as  they  re- 
tained their  existing  lists.  In  1890  a  return  was  made  to 
the  multiple  list. 

In  1904  the  General  Assembly,  by  a  joint  resolution, 
advised  the  state  board  of  education  to  adopt  a  single  list; 
but  this  recommendation  was  not  followed,  Governor 
Montague  alone  favoring  that  plan.  The  state  board  of 
education,  instead  of  adopting  a  single  list,  directed  the 
county  and  city  school  boards  to  appoint  three  teachers  and 
three  members  of  their  respective  boards;  these  persons, 
with  the  division  superintendent,  recommended  books  for 

1  See  discussion  in  section  on  School  Finances,  pp.  54-55. 
*  In  1908-09,  3,354  white  children  and  1,457  colored  children  were 
supplied. 


Public  Education.  43 

their  counties  or  cities  to  the  state  board,  which  reserved  the 
right  to  accept  or  reject  such  lists. 

These  books  were  to  be  furnished  by  the  publishers  at  a 
uniform  price  agreed  upon  by  the  state  board.  Each  high 
school  was  permitted  to  select  from  a  multiple  list.  As  this 
list  was  to  stand  for  four  years,  a  campaign  was  at  once 
begun  by  the  book  publishers.  Mr.  Eggleston,  the  present 
superintendent  of  public  instruction,  says  that  the  pub- 
lishers put  the  cost  of  this  campaign  at  $200,000.  Local 
attorneys  were  employed  by  the  respective  concerns.  Every 
indirect,  and  in  many  cases  direct,  form  of  bribery  is  said 
to  have  been  used.  Ex-Governor  Montague  deplored  the 
corrupting  effect  of  such  a  campaign. 

In  1905,  when  Mr.  Eggleston  was  campaigning  for  the 
state  superintendency,  he  said  that  the  Virginia  School 
Register  for  public  school  teachers  could  be  published  for 
1 8  cents,  and  that  the  teachers  of  the  State  were  being 
charged  75  cents  for  it.  The  state  board  of  education  called 
a  meeting  and  asked  Mr.  Eggleston  to  substantiate  his  state- 
ment. He  did  so  by  proving  that  the  second  clerk  in  the 
department  of  public  instruction  and  a  principal  of  a  Rich- 
mond school  were  receiving  50  cents  royalty  on  each  copy, 
the  printer  retaining  25  cents  for  printing,  packing,  and 
postage.  No  one  was  entitled  to  a  royalty,  as  it  was  the 
duty  of  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction  to  prepare 
the  register.  The  superintendent,  a  Civil  War  veteran,  was 
innocent,  but  was  careless.  The  second  clerk,  at  this  time 
a  candidate  for  state  superintendent  of  public  instruction, 
was  summarily  removed  from  office;  and  the  election  of 
Mr.  Eggleston  was  practically  assured. 

In  1906  a  legislative  committee,  of  which  Speaker  R.  E. 
Byrd  of  the  House  was  chairman,  showed  that  Virginia  was 
paying  for  her  books  more  than  any  other  State  in  the 
Union  except  Montana  and  Utah,  and  that  by  a  single  list 
the  State  could  save  25  per  cent,  or  $50,000  annually. 
In  1908  a  single  list  was  adopted  for  primary  and  grammar 
grades  to  be  in  effect  until  1912  and  thereafter  for  periods 


44  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

of  four  years.  For  high  schools  a  single  list  was  adopted  in 
1910  to  be  in  effect  until  1914.  In  a  few  cases  different  high 
school  books  have  been  adopted  for  cities  and  counties. 
The  selling  price  is  stamped  upon  all  books,  and  the  pub- 
lishing house  pays  the  local  merchant  a  small  commission 
for  handling  them.  Until  the  division  superintendents  and 
county  teachers  become  generally  better  trained,  the  selec- 
tion of  books  by  them  will  not  be  preferable  to  selections 
made  by  the  state  board,  composed  of  six  educators  of  the 
highest  order,  besides  the  two  highest  state  officials.  Then 
why  not  save  the  25  per  cent,  or  $50,000  annually  ? 

Although  unnecessary  changes  of  books  have  been  made 
from  time  to  time,  we  can  find  no  suspicion  of  actual  cor- 
rupt conduct  on  the  part  of  any  members  of  the  state  boards, 
except  against  one  superintendent  of  public  instruction,  and 
this  charge  was  never  proved.  Of  course  indirect  influences 
have  been  exerted,  and  some  officials  have  been  made  in- 
struments. Some  inferior  books  have  been  selected  because 
they  were  written  or  printed  within  the  State.  Members  of 
the  state  board  have  received  unsought  political  aid  from 
agents  or  attorneys  of  book  companies,  for  these  local  rep- 
resentatives usually  pick  their  man  during  the  campaign. 
Occasionally  the  attorney  for  the  company  is  a  state  senator 
or  United  States  congressman  with  much  "push  and  pull." 
Under  the  multiple  system  where  the  selection  is  made  by 
local  and  less  experienced  boards,  the  above  influences  press 
with  more  weight.  Birthday  presents  and  "  hard  cash  "  of 
the  corporations  possessing  the  most  capital,  but  not  neces- 
sarily the  best  books,  can  here  be  most  effectively  and  cor- 
ruptly used. 

Libraries. — The  Virginia  State  Library  was  opened  in 
1829  in  the  Capitol  at  Richmond,  but  in  the  year  1895  it  was 
moved  to  the  Library  Building.  Until  the  Constitutional 
Convention  of  1902  the  secretary  of  the  Commonwealth  was 
ex-officio  librarian,  with,  however,  an  assistant  known  as 
state  librarian ;  and  the  control  of  the  library  was  vested  in 
a  joint  committee  of  the  General  Assembly.  From  1829 


Public  Education.  45 

until  1904  the  interest  in  the  library  did  not  increase,  if 
interest  can  be  measured  by  the  support  given  by  the  General 
Assemblies,  for  the  appropriations  continued  to  average  ap- 
proximately $5,000  per  annum.1  According  to  a  statement 
furnished  the  United  States  Bureau  of  Education  for  its 
1900  report,  there  were  96,000  volumes  in  the  library.  Ac- 
cording to  the  1904  report  of  the  state  librarian  there  were 
only  50,000  volumes,  including  pamphlets.  The  truth  is, 
nobody  knew  how  many  books  there  were  in  the  library 
previous  to  1904.  There  was  no  card  catalogue. 

The  Constitutional  Convention  of  1902  provided  for  the 
reorganization  of  the  library.  Now  the  state  board  of  edu- 
cation appoints  a  board  of  five  directors,  who  serve  without 
compensation  other  than  for  actual  expenses.  The  members 
of  this  board  are  elected,  one  annually,  for  a  term  of  five 
years.  The  first  board,  selected  in  1903,  appointed  in  the 
same  year  the  first  librarian  other  than  the  secretary  of  the 
Commonwealth.  His  work  was  begun  with  much  enthu- 
siasm and  with  the  hearty  cooperation  of  the  library  board. 
A  card  catalogue  was  begun ;  interlibrary  loans  were  inaugu- 
rated; and  a  system  of  traveling  libraries  was  worked  out. 
In  1907,  after  a  legislative  investigation  of  certain  charges 
against  him,  he  resigned. 

His  successor,  the  present  incumbent,  is  administering  the 
affairs  of  the  institution  well.  Eighty-five  thousand  vol- 
umes, including  pamphlets,  are  being  carefully  analyzed  and 
catalogued  according  to  the  Congressional  Library  system. 
The  archives  are  likewise  being  catalogued  and  printed  as 
funds  permit.  Legislative  reference  lists  are  prepared  for 
legislators  and  other  state  officials  upon  request,  and  often 
in  advance  of  the  sessions  of  the  General  Assembly.  Refer- 
ences are  cheerfully  furnished  to  debating  societies.  Ten 
thousand  volumes,  divided  into  two  hundred  and  six  libra- 
ries, are  kept  in  constant  circulation  among  schools  and 
literary  clubs.  These  libraries  are  carried  gratis  by  the 
transportation  companies  of  the  State.  The  library  is  open 

1  Report  of  State  Librarian,  1904,  p.  n. 


46  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

to  the  public,  and  books  are  lent  out  upon  a  permit  from  any 
state  official,  or  upon  a  deposit  of  two  dollars.  Students 
doing  research  work  are  given  all  possible  help  and  every 
reasonable  privilege. 

There  is  a  Voluntary  Library  Association  of  Virginia 
which  is  advocating  state  aid  for  the  much  needed  exten- 
sion work.  This  work  might  be  carried  on  through  a  special 
commission,  but  why  not  utilize  the  State  Library,  which  is 
already  well  organized,  and  form  a  system  of  libraries  in- 
stead of  independent  chaotic  groups? 

The  State  Law  Library  until  1902  was  under  the  control 
of  the  State  Library;  but  since  that  time  it  has  been  under 
the  control  of  the  supreme  court  of  appeals.  Another  inde- 
pendent library  arrangement  has  resulted  from  an  act  passed 
by  the  General  Assembly  of  1908,  by  which  the  State, 
through  the  state  board  of  education,  offers  $10  toward  a 
library  for  any  public  school  whose  patrons  will  raise  $15. 
To  this  $25  the  district  school  board  is  obliged  to  add  $15 
and  a  book-case.  The  $40  worth  of  books  are  selected  from 
a  list  prescribed  by  the  state  board  of  education. 

Politics  and  the  Schools. — When  the  public  school  system 
was  established,  practically  all  white  Virginians  were  Demo- 
crats. In  1881  the  coalition  of  Readjuster  Democrats  and 
Republicans  carried  the  State,  and  the  victors  took  the 
school  spoils  from  state  superintendent  down  to  district 
trustees.  The  boards  of  visitors  for  state  schools  of  higher 
education  were  declared  vacant  by  the  General  Assembly, 
and  Readjusters  were  appointed  to  fill  their  places.1  The 
changes  on  these  boards  did  not,  however,  to  any  consider- 
able extent  affect  the  faculties,  though  they  did  remove  a 
number  of  administrative  officers. 

Since  this  one  term  of  office,  Democrats  have  controlled 
the  State,  and  the  administration  of  schools  has  been  strictly 
by  Democrats.  Today  the  eight  members  of  the  state  board 
of  education,  including  the  state  superintendent  of  public 
instruction,  the  two  supervisors,  and  the  hundred  and  four 

'Acts,  1881-82,  c.  201;  1882,  c.  18;  1882,  c.  46. 


Public  Education.  47 

division  superintendents  are  all  Democrats,1  with  one  or  two 
possible  exceptions  among  the  division  superintendents.  Of 
the  one  hundred  visitors  of  the  higher  or  special  state  schools 
ninety-five  are  Democrats,  and  three  of  the  five  Republicans 
are  colored  members  of  the  board  for  Hampton  Normal  and 
Industrial  Institute,  a  non-state  school  to  which  the  State 
transfers  one  third  of  the  Federal  appropriation  for  the 
teaching  of  agricultural  and  mechanical  arts. 

The  district  trustees  are  elected  by  the  county  electoral 
boards,  composed  of  the  division  superintendent,  the  com- 
monwealth-attorney, and  a  non-office-holder  appointed  by 
the  circuit  judge.  At  least  a  majority  of  the  members  of 
this  board  are  practically  certain  to  be  Democratic,  and  in 
some  cases  their  trust  is  abused  by  the  appointment  as 
trustees  of  insignificant  henchmen  who  are  flattered  by  the 
office.  This  practice,  however,  is  not  general,  and  there  are 
a  great  many  Republican  trustees.  As  the  personnel  of  the 
division  superintendents  improves,  the  greater  will  be  their 
influence  in  selecting  competent  trustees. 

In  certificating  teachers  the  state  examiners  have  never 
been  accused  of  partiality.  After  receiving  a  certificate  a 
position  is  secured  through  the  local  trustees,  who  are  seldom 
influenced  in  their  selection  of  teachers  by  party  politics, 
although,  until  prohibited  by  an  act  of  the  General  Assembly 
of  I9o6,2  the  employment  of  relatives  was  a  common  prac- 
tice. In  1910,  as  a  further  sanction  to  this  law,  it  was  pro- 
vided that  if  a  board  of  trustees  selects  a  teacher  who  is 
without  a  proper  certificate,  or  one  who  is  a  brother,  sister, 
wife,  son,  or  daughter  of  any  member  of  the  board,  the 
member  is  responsible  for  the  salary.3 

Finances. — The  constitution  of  1869  provided  that  the 
interest  on  the  Literary  Fund,  a  capitation  tax  of  $i,  and  a 
general  property  tax  of  not  less  than  I  nor  more  than  5 

aThe  appointments  of  division  superintendents  by  the  state  board 
of  education  must  be  confirmed  by  a  Democratic  senate,  for  which 
reason  the  state  board  hesitate  to  appoint  a  Republican. 

2  Acts,  1906,  c.  293. 

'Acts,  1910,  c.  338. 


48  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

mills  on  the  dollar  should  be  apportioned  among  the  public 
free  school  districts  according  to  the  number  of  children 
between  the  ages  of  five  and  twenty-one.  Either  the  county 
or  the  school  district  was  permitted  to  supplement  this  state 
allotment  by  a  local  tax  not  to  exceed  5  mills.  The  next 
year  the  General  Assembly  enacted  the  constitutional  re- 
quirement placing  the  minimum  state  school  rate  at  one  mill. 
This  has  remained  the  rate,  but  since  1882  the  General  As- 
sembly has  added  an  annual  lump  appropriation  from  the 
general  state  funds.  At  first  this  lump  appropriation  was  in 
consideration  of  money  diverted  from  the  school  funds; 
but  when  this  was  replaced,  the  appropriations  continued, 
and  have  recently  increased  much  in  amount. 

In  1871  a  vote  was  taken  in  every  county  of  the  State, 
except  Warwick  County,  to  determine  whether  additional 
sums  for  paying  teachers  should  be  raised  by  taxation. 
Funds  were  voted  in  seventy-three  counties  and  not  voted  in 
twenty-five ;  cities  did  not  vote.  But  in  no  county  did  the 
local  funds  exceed  the  expected  state  funds.1  In  fact,  Dr. 
Ruffner  advised  that  the  local  rate  be  limited  to  one  mill, 
for  fear  that  a  higher  rate  might  create  too  much  opposition 
on  the  part  of  the  property  owners.2 

Not  only  was  one  mill,  the  minimum  allowed  by  the  con- 
stitution, assessed  by  the  State,  but  a  part  of  this  was  for  a 
decade  diverted  from  its  proper  channels.  For  several  years 
the  delinquent  school  taxes,  when  finally  paid,  were  diverted. 
In  1872-1873  this  one  mill  tax  was  paying  to  the  schools 
$250,000  less  than  in  1870-1871.  When  the  auditor's  at- 
tention was  called  to  this  misapplication  of  funds,  his  reply 
was  that  interest  on  the  public  debt  caused  all  departments 
to  suffer,  and  that  the  state  officers,  criminal  charges,  and 
support  to  the  asylums  and  the  penitentiary  must  be  paid, 
and  therefore  the  schools  must  suffer  most.  In  1871  the 
governor  vetoed  a  bill  compelling  the  auditor  to  pay  to 
schools  the  income  from  the  one  mill  tax,  on  the  ground  that 

'Report  of  the  Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction,  1871,  p.  13. 
"Report  of  the  Commissioner  of  Education,  1880,  p.  326. 


Public  Education.  49 

paying  debt  was  more  sacred  than  educating  children, 
though  both  were  proper.  On  July  31,  1878,  indebtedness 
to  teachers  was  $244,87 1.1  That  fall  very  few  rural  schools 
opened,  the  governor  being  unable  to  borrow  $200,000  to 
relieve  the  situation.  By  the  end  of  this  session  a  total  of 
$1,544,765  had  been  diverted  from  the  public  school  fund,2 
In  1879  the  Henkel  bill  prevented  any  future  diversion  of 
the  school  fund,  and  the  amount  due  the  fund  was  gradually 
restored. 

The  teachers  receiving  miserably  low  salaries  were  often 
compelled  to  sell  their  warrants  at  a  discount.  This  had  be- 
come so  common  that  when  the  delay  was  no  longer  neces- 
sary, some  treasurers  would  delay  paying  that  they  might 
profit  by  buying  warrants  at  a  discount.  In  1887  a  statute 
was  passed  imposing  a  fine  or  jail  sentence  upon  any  county 
officer  who  purchased  county  or  corporation  warrants  or 
school  claims;3  and  in  1894  an  act  provided  that  any  treas- 
urer failing  to  pay  a  warrant  when  he  had  funds  might  be 
deprived  of  handling  the  same  by  the  local  school  boards.* 
Not  until  the  past  decade  have  teachers  all  over  the  State 
been  promptly  paid ;  and  in  fact  in  1910  six  counties  were  in 
arrears  in  the  pay  of  teachers  to  the  extent  of  from  $500  to 
$3,000.  This  present  shortage  is  due  to  building  new 
school-houses  without  raising  the  tax  rate  sufficiently  for  the 
much  needed  improvement. 

The  available  principal  of  the  Literary  Fund  has  increased 
from  $1,596,069  in  1871  to  $2,308,300  in  I9io.5  The  one 
dollar  of  the  capitation  tax  has  remained  for  the  state  school 
fund,  and  the  collection  of  the  same  is  made  surer  by  a 
provision  of  the  constitution  of  1902  which  limits  the  right 
of  franchise  to  such  as  have  paid  their  capitation  taxes  for 
the  three  preceding  years.6  The  General  Assembly  of  1884 
appropriated  annually  the  sum  of  $10,000  from  this  fund 

1  Governor's  Message,  Senate  Journal. 
'  Senate  Journal,  1879-80,  Doc.  No.  12. 

*  Acts,  1887-88,  c.  13. 

*  Acts,  1893-94,  c.  639. 
'Report  of  Second  Auditor. 

8  Constitution  of  1902,  Art.  2,  Sec.  18,  20. 

4 


50  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

for  the  Farmville  State  Normal.  The  second  auditor, 
through  whom  this  fund  had  to  be  drawn,  refused  to  pay, 
claiming  it  to  be  unconstitutional  to  expend  the  Literary 
Fund  for  schools  other  than  "public  free  schools."  The 
Virginia  court  of  appeals  sustained  the  second  auditor  on 
the  ground  that  "  public  free  schools  "  applied  only  to  ele- 
mentary or  graded  schools.1  Tne  constitution  of  1902 
limited  the  use  of  the  interest  on  the  Literary  Fund,  the 
capitation  tax,  and  the  one  mill  property  tax  to  "  primary 
and  grammar  grades."  The  state  conditional  aid  to  high 
schools  is  in  addition  to  the  above. 

Since  the  first  election  of  1871  the  necessary  amount  of 
county  and  district  funds  has  been  recommended  to  the 
county  board  of  supervisors  by  the  division  superintendent, 
representing  the  county  board  of  trustees.  If  the  super- 
visors refuse  to  levy  a  tax  at  the  rate  recommended,  the 
county  board  of  school  trustees  may  demand  that  the  rate 
be  submitted  to  the  people  of  the  county  or  of  any  district. 
By  an  act  of  iox)82  the  General  Assembly  has  allowed  county 
school  rates  to  vary  from  I  to  4  mills  and  district  rates  from 
i  to  4  mills,  provided  the  total  of  county  and  district  rates 
does  not  exceed  5  mills.  Another  opportunity  to  supple- 
ment the  school  tax  is  given  the  sub-district,  which  may,  by 
the  majority  of  freeholders,  have  the  supervisors  add  to 
their  tax  rates,  provided  the  total  county,  district,  and  sub- 
district  rates  do  not  exceed  5  mills.  In  cities  and  towns 
which  form  separate  school  districts  the  councils  may  de- 
termine the  rate,  provided  it  does  not  exceed  5  mills ;  or  the 
council  may  make  an  appropriation  in  lieu  of  such  a  levy. 
When  the  council  does  this,  the  amount  of  the  appropria- 
tion does  not  seem  to  be  limited;  at  any  rate  some  towns 
have  appropriated  for  public  schools  more  than  a  5  mill 
levy  would  have  yielded. 

In  1906  the  county  board  was  given  power  to  apportion 
county  funds  among  districts  according  to  its  best  judgment; 

1  State  Female  Normal  School  v.  The  Auditors,  79  Virginia  Re- 
ports, p.  233. 
"Acts,  1908,  c.  210. 


Public  Education.  51 

but  no  district  which  runs  any  school  therein  less  than  four 
months  may  receive  an  appropriation.1  This  was  intended 
to  allow  discrimination  against  negroes,  but  counties  with 
compulsory  education  may  avail  themselves  of  this  provision 
to  distribute  county  funds  according  to  actual  attendance. 
In  other  words,  those  counties  that  wish  more  stringent 
provisions  for  compulsory  education  than  those  offered  by 
the  state  laws  can  by  means  of  this  provision  make  the 
trustees  of  the  respective  districts  bestir  themselves.  The 
county  board  may  compel  district  boards  to  pay  expenses  of 
trustees  in  attending  county  board  meetings,  but  the  sum 
may  not  exceed  $10  for  any  one  district. 

In  1908  an  act  was  passed  to  pension  deserving  public 
school  teachers2  who  had  taught  for  twenty-five  years,  or 
twenty  years  if  mental  or  physical  infirmity  or  age  had 
rendered  one  inefficient  for  service.  In  1910  this  was 
amended;3  and  now  pensions  are  given  to  men  who  have 
taught  for  thirty  years  and  have  reached  the  age  of  fifty- 
eight,  and  to  women  who  have  taught  for  thirty  years  and 
have  reached  the  age  of  fifty.  If  the  pension  is  sought  be- 
cause of  mental  or  physical  disability,  the  applicant  may 
have  taught  only  twenty  years,  but  in  this  event  the  applica- 
tion must  be  approved  both  by  the  state  board  of  education 
and  by  the  state  board  of  health.  The  amount  of  the  pen- 
sion is  one  half  of  the  salary  received  at  the  time  of  retire- 
ment, provided  no  teacher  receive  more  than  $400  annual 
pension;  principals,  however,  may  receive  $500.  By  the 
1910  amendment  the  pension  is  based  on  the  average  salary 
received  during  the  five  years  just  preceding  retirement. 

The  funds  for  pensions  are  obtained  by  deducting  one  per 
cent,  from  the  current  salary  of  the  teachers  plus  an  annual 
appropriation  from  the  State  of  $5,000  and  the  income  from 
a  small  permanent  endowment  fund.4  This  permanent  en- 
dowment fund  is  accumulated  by  deducting  "  from  the  first 

1  Acts,  1906,  c.  248. 
*Acts,  1908,  c.  313. 


'Acts,  1910,  c.  97. 

4  In  June,  191 1,  the  permanent  fund  was  $49,266. 


52  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

year's  pension  an  amount  equal  to  thirty  per  centum  of  the 
average  annual  salary  earned  by  such  person  [the  pensioner] 
during  the  last  five  years  he  was  a  teacher  in  this  State  less 
the  amounts  already  contributed  to  the  pension  fund  by  such 
person  retired."  When  the  local  school  board  enters  into  a 
contract  with  a  teacher,  he  must  agree  to  the  deduction  of 
the  one  per  cent,  of  his  salary;  and  this  is  deducted  every 
month.  Since  1910  the  state  board,  to  facilitate  collection, 
has  deducted  from  the  state  funds  distributed  to  each 
county  one  per  cent,  of  the  amount  paid  the  teachers  of 
that  county  the  previous  year;  if  salaries  in  a  county  are 
increased,  one  per  cent,  of  this  increase  is  deducted  the  fol- 
lowing year.  The  pensions  are  paid  quarterly  by  the  second 
auditor.  If  at  any  time  the  funds  should  prove  insufficient, 
the  amount  on  hand  must  be  distributed  pro  rata. 

Since  1908  296  persons  have  been  pensioned,  of  whom  1 1 
have  died  and  14  have  resumed  teaching.  In  1910  the  re- 
ceipts and  expenditures  of  the  fund  about  balanced.  It  is 
estimated  that  the  list  of  271  pensioners  (239  whites,  32 
colored)  will  increase  to  about  400  in  five  years,  and  there 
remain.  It  is  also  estimated  that  the  one  per  cent,  of  the 
teachers'  salaries  will  amount  to  $40,000.  The  State  has 
practically  committed  itself  to  the  appropriation  of  $5,000 
per  annum,  making  the  receipts  $45,000.  It  is  estimatecl 
that  $60,000  will  be  required  to  pay  the  pensions.  There- 
fore unless  the  State  increases  its  appropriation  or  some 
change  is  made,  the  pensioner  will  in  the  future  receive  only 
about  75  per  cent,  of  his  nominal  pension  as  provided  by  the 
pro  rata  clause.1 

The  state  board  asked  the  General  Assembly  for  this  pen- 
sion measure.  They  knew  that  it  would  be  unpopular 
among  the  large  class  whose  intentions  are  to  teach  only 
temporarily,  and,  indeed,  the  average  length  of  service  is 
only  about  six  years;  but  they  knew  that  the  State  could 
not  afford  a  straight  pension.  It  has  enabled  the  local 
trustees  to  rid  themselves  of  inefficient  veteran  teachers  in 

1  Virginia  Journal  of  Education,  June,  191 1,  p.  593. 


Public  Education.  53 

an  honorable  manner.  The  one  per  cent,  deducted  from  the 
salary  is  not  enough  to  deter  makeshift  teachers,  many 
of  whom  do  good  service  ;  but  the  prospect  of  a  pension  will 
keep  in  the  State  professional  teachers  who  are  offered 
somewhat  better  salaries  elsewhere. 

By  an  act  of  the  General  Assembly,  passed  in  1906  and 
amended  in  iQoS,1  an  excellent  use  has  been  made  of  part  of 
the  principal  of  the  Literary  Fund.  As  a  result  of  this  act 
this  fund,  which  had  been  invested  in  state  bonds  bearing  3 
per  cent,  interest,  is  being  converted  into  cash  by  the  state 
board  of  education  to  the  extent  of  $100,000  per  annum; 
and  this  fund  is  then  lent  to  district  school  boards  for  new 
school-houses  at  the  rate  of  4  per  cent,  for  sums  of  less 
than  $3,000,  and  5  per  cent,  on  the  amount  in  excess  of 
$3,000.  The  maximum  amount  lent  on  one  building  is 
$10,000,  and  only  50  per  cent,  of  the  total  cost  may  be 
loaned.  The  Literary  Fund  receives  fifteen  notes  from  the 
district  trustees,  which  must  be  paid  annually  with  interest. 
A  lien  is  taken  on  the  property,  and  the  building  must  be 
insured  by  the  trustees.  The  plans  for  the  building  must  be 
approved  by  the  state  board,  and  the  money  may  be  bor- 
rowed without  a  vote  on  the  part  of  the  patrons,  which 
would  be  required  in  case  of  a  bond  issue.  The  additional 
50  per  cent,  can  usually  be  paid  either  from  current  revenue 
or  by  a  current  loan  without  a  bond  issue.  This  power 
placed  in  the  hands  of  the  trustees  has  resulted  in  wonderful 
improvement  in  the  way  of  much  needed  buildings.2  Most 
districts  had  formerly  paid  6  per  cent,  interest;  this  was 
true  especially  in  rural  districts,  which  now  pay  only  4  per 
cent,  as  they  usually  borrow  less  than  $3,000.  At  the  same 
time  the  Literary  Fund  has  a  safe  investment.  This  loan 
plan  was  suggested  by  one  of  the  state  examiners. 

In  1906  there  were  only  10  four-year  public  free  high 
schools  in  the  State.  In  the  44  so-called  high  schools 
$102,480  was  spent  for  support,  $45,000  for  buildings.  The 


s,  1906,  c.  252;  1908,  c.  83. 
*  See  table  on  page  57. 


54  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

General  Assembly  of  that  year  responded  to  a  request  of  the 
department  of  education  by  appropriating  a  subsidy  of  $50,- 
<ooo  to  encourage  the  establishment  of  high  schools.  This 
was  apportioned  among  the  school  districts  of  the  State  in 
sums  not  exceeding  $400,  provided  the  districts  raised  an 
amount  not  less  than  that  contributed  by  the  State.  This 
money  was  distributed  according  to  requirements  specified 
by  the  state  board.  The  chief  requirements  of  the  board 
were  a  high  school  building  and  a  prescribed  local  fund  for 
teachers'  salaries. 

In  1908  the  state  subsidy  was  increased  to  $100,000  plus 
$15,000  for  normal  training  departments  to  be  located  in 
about  20  selected  high  schools  and  $20,000  for  agricultural 
and  manual  training  departments  in  10  high  schools.1  As  a 
result  of  this  conditional  state  aid  the  local  school  funds  for 
support  of  high  schools  have  increased  from  $102,480  in 
1906  to  $320,403  in  1910;  and  the  sum  spent  on  improve- 
ments has  increased  from  $45,000  in  1906  to  $502,000  in 
1910.  Encouraged  by  this  showing,  the  General  Assembly 
in  1910  appropriated  $25,000  for  rural  consolidated  school 
buildings,  to  be  distributed  conditionally  at  the  discretion 
of  the  state  board. 

A  great  stimulus  to  better  attendance  or  compulsory  at- 
tendance would  result  from  distributing  state  school  funds 
according  to  actual  attendance  instead  of  according  to  school 
population.  When  the  present  method  of  distributing  state 
funds  according  to  population  of  school  age  originated  in 
1870,  the  idea  was  thereby  simply  to  compel  the  localities  to 
be  taxed.  For  a  large  portion  of  school  taxes  to  come 
through  state  channels  is  peculiar  to  the  South,  and  was 
necessary  until  local  interest  could  be  aroused  in  a  public 
school  system.  Since  1870  taxable  values  have  been  con- 
centrated in  cities  and  progressive  counties ;  hence  the  pres- 
ent distribution  in  many  sections  represents  charity  on 
the  part  of  the  more  progressive  communities.  That  the 

1The  last  item  was  increased  in  1910  to  $30,000;  and  for  1911  the 
additional  sum  of  $25,000  for  permanent  improvements  was  added. 


Public  Education.  55 

wealthy  should  be  taxed  according  to  ability  to  pay  is 
proper ;  but  that  the  struggling  property  owner  who  lives  in 
a  wealthy  community  should  be  taxed  for  a  wealthy  prop- 
erty owner  in  a  poor  community  is  improper.  Some  coun- 
ties have  also  taken  unfair  advantage  of  this  method  of 
collecting  and  redistributing.1  So  the  State  can  to-day 
justify  its  method  only  upon  the  basis  of  charity;  and 
charity  should  not  be  indiscriminate,  but  to  those  who  help 
themselves.  "  In  some  cases,"  said  Governor  Swanson  in 
his  message  of  1908,  "the  increased  state  aid  to  primary 
schools  resulted  in  a  decreased  local  rate  equal  to  that  given 
by  the  State.  The  State  should  not  permit  state  generosity 
to  be  responded  to  by  local  parsimony."  Why  not  dis- 
tribute all  state  school  funds  condit!onally  ?  First,  no  school 
district  should  receive  any  state  aid  until  that  district  has 
raised  by  local  taxation  a  prescribed  amount  for  every  child 
of  school  age  within  the  district.  This  amount  should  be 
such  as  would  not  oppress  the  less  wealthy  districts. 
Second,  the  distribution  should  be  made  on  the  basis  of 
actual  attendance.  This  basis  would  encourage  both  regular 
voluntary,  or  "  compulsory,"  attendance  and  the  lengthen- 
ing of  the  school  term.  But  a  distribution  on  the  basis  of 
attendance  should  be  in  some  inverse  proportion  to  the 
density  of  population,  as  it  is  much  easier  for  urban  dis- 
tricts to  have  a  large  attendance  than  for  rural  districts. 

An  incentive  fund  played  an  important  part  in  the  estab- 
lishment of  graded  schools  in  Virginia.  Reference  is  here 
made  to  the  Peabody  Fund.  In  1867  George  Peabody,  then 
of  London,  gave  to  Southern  education  $3,500,000  in  stocks 
and  bonds.  Of  this  sum  $1,500,000  of  Mississ:ppi  and 
Florida  state  bonds  were  afterwards  repudiated,  leaving  an 
available  fund  of  $2,000,000.  For  the  distribution  of  the 
interest  of  this  fund  the  board,  composed  largely  of  North- 
ern men,  sent  Dr.  Sears.  He  made  Staunton,  Virginia,  his 
headquarters,  and  immediately  after  arriving  addressed  the 

1  This  condition  results  from  the  fact  that  cities  are  obliged  to 
assess  property  at  nearly  its  full  value  to  hold  down  the  nominal  tax 
rate ;  and  State  taxes  are  assessed  on  this  same  valuation. 


56  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

Constitutional  Convention.  The  convention  ordered  ten 
thousand  copies  of  this  address  printed.  Dr.  Sears  was 
much  pleased  with  the  appreciation  with  which  his  address 
met,  and  for  the  following  ten  years  Virginia  received  the 
lion's  share  of  the  fund,  $214,0x50.  This  was  distributed  to 
graded  free  schools  with  an  enrollment  of  one  hundred,  on 
condition  that  the  district  pay  at  least  twice  the  amount 
given  from  the  Peabody  Fund.  Often  much  more  than 
double  the  amount  was  required. 

From  1877  to  the  present  time  Virginia  has  received  about 
$60,000  in  two-hundred  dollar  scholarships  to  the  Peabody 
Normal  School  at  Nashville,  Tennessee,  which  institution 
was  endowed  in  1910  with  $1,000,000  of  the  fund.  Since 
1880  Virginia  has  received  annually  from  the  fund  about 
$5,000  for  the  encouragement  of  normal  courses  at  the 
Farmville  and  Hampton  Schools  and  for  summer  normal 
schools;  hence,  in  all,  Virginia  has  received  more  than 
$400,000  from  this  fund.  But  this  fund  of  $400,000  has 
been  worth  ten  times  that  amount  because  it  was  used  as  an 
incentive  fund.  To-day  an  educational  commission  which  is 
preparing  an  elaborate  report  on  the  better  systematization 
of  education  in  Virginia  is  also  partly  sustained  by  aid  from 
this  fund.  The  boys'  farm  demonstration  movement  is 
likewise  receiving  aid  from  it;  and  the  supervisor  of  rural 
schools  and  the  supervisor  of  colored  schools  are  paid  from 
it.  It  should  be  observed  that  this  fund  has  always  been 
used  as  an  incentive.  First,  it  was  used  as  an  incentive  to 
establish  schools ;  next,  to  prepare  teachers  for  these  schools ; 
now,  to  improve  and  extend  the  operation  of  the  schools. 

In  the  following  table  the  most  encouraging  feature  is 
the  increase  in  local  funds  during  the  present  decade.  In 
the  northeastern  States  of  the  Union,  where  public  schools 
were  local  before  they  were  state  institutions,  practically  the 
whole  school  fund  is  raised  by  local  taxes.  In  the  North- 
west the  public  school  funds  were  gifts  of  public  lands; 
but  to-day  this  is  supplemented  by  local  taxes.  The  systems 
were  forced  upon  the  South  as  the  result  of  the  Civil  War, 


Public  Education. 


57 


and  for  this  reason  they  have  been  working  out  from  the 
States.  The  best  symptom  of  real  interest  is  the  increase  of 
local  rates. 

GROWTH  OF  EXPENDITURES  SINCE  1871. 


Year. 

State  funds. 

County  and 

Other  funds 
(local)  ^ 

Teachers'  monthly 
salary. 

Value  of  school 
property  owned 

Males. 

Females. 

by  districts. 

1871 

$    362,000 

*     330.332 

__ 

$32.36 

$26.33 

$    189  680 

1875 

488,490 

47^,977 

— 

33-52 

28.71 

757.181 

I88o 

596,629 

490,039 

— 

29.2O 

24.65 

1,177.544 

1885 

844,475 

606,421 

— 

31.00 

26.88 

1.819,256 

1890 

851.467 

705.429 

&31.245 

31.69 

26.61 

2,235/85 

I»95 

974,351 

805,0  .'5 

44,910 

32.82 

26.95 

2,982,828 

1900 

1.015,538 

926,993 

70,203 

32.47 

26.18 

3-536,293 

1  905 

1,128.262 

1,214,973 

88,866 

36.86 

28.11 

4,297.625 

1910 

1,584,933 

2,767,302 

465,269 

47-31 

35.83 

8,555,343 

Schools  for  the  Colored. — The  following  section  of  the 
constitution  of  1869  was  a  guarantee  of  education  for  the 
negro :  "  The  general  assembly  shall  provide  by  law,  at  its 
first  session  under  this  constitution,  a  uniform  system  of 
public  free  schools,  and  for  its  gradual  equal  (italics  mine), 
and  full  introduction  into  all  the  counties  of  the  State  by 
the  year  eighteen  hundred  and  seventy-six,  or  as  much 
earlier  as  practicable."2 

On  January  26,  1870,  an  act  of  Congress  was  approved 
which  admitted  the  State  of  Virginia  to  representation  in 
the  Congress  of  the  United  States  on  certain  conditions. 
The  following  condition  among  others  was  complied  with: 
"  The  Constitution  of  Virginia  shall  never  be  so  amended 
or  changed  as  to  deprive  any  citizen  of  the  United  States, 
of  the  school  rights  and  privileges  secured  by  the  constitu- 
tion of  said  state."3  The  educational  article  of  the  constitu- 
tion of  Virginia  of  1869  contained  one  other  section  which 
was  meant  primarily  for  the  protection  of  the  negro,  namely, 
that  "  Each  city  and  county  shall  be  held  accountable  for  the 

1  Gifts  and  supplemental  tuition  paid  by  patrons  for  a  prolonged 
term  or  for  higher  courses. 

2  Art.  8,  Sec.  3. 

•  U.  S.  Statutes  at  Large,  XVI,  62,  63. 


58  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

destruction  of  school  property  that  may  take  place  within 
its  limits  by  incendiaries  or  open  violence."1  This  last  men- 
tioned fear  was  probably  unfounded.  At  any  rate  no  build- 
ings are  reported  to  have  been  burnt  by  incendiaries. 

In  the  Constitutional  Convention  the  twenty-four  negro 
members  had  insisted  upon  the  coeducation  of  the  races; 
but,  whatever  the  conviction  of  the  "  carpet-baggers  "  might 
have  been,  they  clearly  foresaw  that  the  mixture  of  the  races 
would  make  inoperative  the  whole  system.2  The  right  to 
compel  colored  children  to  attend  separate  schools  was  soon 
judicially  upheld,  and  in  1900  it  was  further  decided  that 
district  school  boards  might  determine,  without  interfer- 
ence by  the  Federal  court,  to  which  race  pupils  belonged, 
provided  the  parents  of  the  pupils  were  given  an  appeal  to 
some  superior  school  officer,  such  as  a  division  superin- 
tendent.3 

Dr.  Ruffner,  the  first  superintendent  of  public  instruction, 
believed  in  the  education  of  the  negro,  and  began  his  ad- 
ministration by  impartially  enrolling  white  and  colored.  In 
1882  he  was  superseded  by  a  Readjuster;  and,  as  the  Read- 
juster  victory  was  due  to  the  colored  vote,  the  negro  re- 
ceived even  better  treatment  than  under  Superintendent 
Ruffner.  The  Readjuster  party  (1879-1883)  made  the  im- 
provement of  public  schools,  especially  those  for  the  colored, 
a  campaign  issue ;  and  for  this  reason  the  so-called  "  Bour- 
bons" (conservative  Democrats),  who  had  never  been 
strongly  in  favor  of  a  public  school  system,  became  loud  in 
their  praise  of  public  schools.  The  Democratic  platform, 
drafted  in  1883  at  the  state  convention  in  Lynchburg,  advo- 
cated colored  teachers  and  trustees  for  colored  schools ;  and 
in  1885  free  text-books  for  all  children  were  promised  by 
the  Democratic  party.  When  the  General  Assembly  con- 
vened, however,  the  promise  was  found  to  be  "  impractic- 
able at  that  time  except  as  to  colored  teachers."  By  1886 
the  Democrats  were  back  in  power;  and  until  the  last  half 

'Art.  8,  Sec.  II.~~ 

3  Debates. 

*  98  Virginia  Reports,  499 ;  36  S.  E.  529. 


Public  Education.  59 

decade  the  educational  conditions  of  the  colored  were  not 
much  improved.  Superintendent  J.  D.  Eggleston  and  the 
last  three  governors,  however,  have  taken  a  more  liberal- 
minded  view,  and  the  table  below  will  show  that  from  the 
present  educational  campaign  the  negroes,  as  well  as  the 
whites,  have  profited.  The  law  of  1906  which  allows  the 
county  school  boards  to  apportion  county  funds  among  the 
districts  according  to  the  best  judgment  of  the  board  was 
prompted  by  anti-negro  sentiment;  but  too  much  stress 
must  not  be  laid  on  this  point,  as  this  phase  was  not 
emphasized  when  the  measure  was  debated. 

In  1910  the  average  salary  per  month  for  teachers  was  as 
follows:  white  male,  $52.15;  white  female,  $37.54;  colored 
male,  $31.21 ;  colored  female,  $27.82.  A  still  better  com- 
parison is  the  following  statement :  the  annual  cost  of  teach- 
ing each  white  child  in  actual  attendance  was  $12.84;  the 
cost  for  each  colored  child  was  $5.60. 

Though  it  is  impossible  to  show  exactly  what  portion  of 
public  school  expenses  are  borne  by  the  colored,  the  fol- 
lowing table  will  show  approximately  what  portion  they  con- 
tribute and  how  much  is  spent  upon  them: 

Sources  of  State  Revenue  for  1909.  Paid  by: 

White.  Colored. 

Realty  tax   $1,327,268  $  60,397* 

Personalty  tax    518,732  18,701 

Capitation   tax    326  591  75,9-8o 

Income  tax 109,940  24 

Other  taxes,  licenses,  etc 3,716,857  37-i68a 

Total  state  revenue  $5,999,388  $192,270 

Percentage  of  state  revenue 97  3 

1  This  item  and  the  three  succeeding  ones  are  obtained  by  subtract- 
ing delinquent  taxes  for  1909,  as  reported  by  the  state  auditor  (An- 
nual Report,  1910),  from  the  assessment  of  1909   (Annual  Report, 
1909),  where  the  items  are  reported  separately  for  the  two  races. 
The  only  considerable  delinquent  taxes  that  will  be  paid  later  are 
delinquent  realty  taxes  amounting  to  $42,993  for  whites  and  $7,855 
for  colored. 

2  These  items  are  not  reported  separately  for  the  races,  it  being 
assumed  that  the  whites  pay  practically  all.     The  observations  of 
those  by  whom  it  can  be  best  approximated  and  my  own  observa- 
tions place  the  percentage,  paid  by  the  colored,  of  license  taxes,  cor- 
poration   franchise   taxes,    charter    fees,    insurance   premium   taxes, 
inheritance  taxes,  and  so  on,  which  make  up  these  amounts,  at  one 
per  cent.     However,  since  some  of  these  items  are  partly  indirect, 
the  negro  indirectly  pays  more  than  I  per  cent,  thereof. 


6o 


Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 


3  per  cent,  of  $1,584,933  (total  state  expenditures  for  public 
schools)     $  47,548 

4  per  cent  of  $3,232,571  (total  local  expenditures  for  public 
schools)  129.308* 

Amount  contributed  to  public  free  schools  by  the  colored.  .$176,858 
Amount  spent  on  public  free  schools  for  the  colored,  about  500,000* 

GROWTH  OF  COLORED  SCHOOLS. 


Percent- 

Percent- 

Percent- 

Year. 

Enumera- 
tion.   Ages 

Enrollment. 

Daily 
attend- 

age of  at- 
tendance 

age  of  at- 
tendance 

Months 

Teach- 
ers em- 

age of 
whom 

from  5  to  21. 

ance. 

on  enu- 

on enroll- 

taught. 

ployed. 

were 

meration. 

ment. 

colored. 

1871 

164,019 

38,554 

23.452 

14.2 

60.8 

706 

70 

1875 

202,640 

54-941 

29,871 

147 

54-3 

1,064 

50 

i8«x> 

240,980 

68,600 

38,764 

16.0 

56.3 

1,256 

62 

1885 

265,249 

109.108 

60,845 

22.9 

55  7 

1,917 

86 

1890 

275,388 

122,059 

63,317 

22.9 

51-8 

2,153 

9» 

1895 

268,503 

120,453 

64,700 

24.0 

53-7 

2,243 

92 

1900 

265,258 

119,898 

66,549 

25.0 

55-5 

2,335 

93 

1905 

214,1523 

110,059 

62,621 

29.1 

56.8 

2,233 

97 

IQIO 

217,5253 

"9,657 

73,155 

33-6 

61.  i 

5-994 

2,393 

99 

II.    HIGHER  EDUCATION. 

William  and  Mary  College. — On  July  31,  1619,  the  first 
General  Assembly  of  Virginia  petitioned  the  London  Com- 
pany to  send,  "When  they  shall  think  it  most  convenient, 
workmen  of  all  sorts  for  the  erection  of  the  university  and 
college."  A  hundred  persons,  including  farmers  to  till  the 
ground,  were  sent.  The  Indian  massacre  of  1622  caused 
a  check  to  and  a  temporary  cessation  of  the  ambitious  plans. 
In  the  year  1660  the  General  Assembly  again  considered  the 

1  Here  is  attributed  to  the  colored  the  payment  of  4  per  cent,  of 
local  school  taxes  because  the  latter  are  derived  principally  from  a 
property  tax  which  is  based  upon  the  same  valuation  as  the  state 
property  tax ;  and  of  this  the  colored  pay  4  per  cent. 

2  The  only  school  expenditures  kept  separate  are  the  salaries  of 
teachers.    For  colored  teachers  $409,711  was  spent  during  the  ses- 
sion of  1909-1910.     Of  the  total  expenditures  for  both  races,  for  all 
purposes,    the    cost   of    teachers    was    79   per   cent.     Therefore,    as 
$409,711   is  79  per  cent,  of  $518,621,  we  might  say  that  this  figure 
represents  the  amount  spent  on  the  colored  schools.     But  because 
the  accommodations  for  the  colored  are  much  inferior  to  those  for 
the  whites,  it  is  only  safe  to  say  that  the  negro  receives  for  public 
free  schools  less  than  $500,000,  and  pays  in  taxes,  directly,  about 
$176,856. 

*  Between  7  and  20  years. 

*  White  schools  ran  7.37  months. 


Public  Education.  61 

establishment  of  a  college.  Sir  William  Berkeley  and  others 
subscribed  to  the  fund;  but  the  colony  was  in  a  restive 
state,  and  the  plan  was  not  to  materialize  for  thirty  years. 

In  1691  Rev.  James  Blair,  of  the  Church  of  England,  was 
elected  agent  for  the  college  by  the  General  Assembly  of 
Virginia.  Two  years  later  he  secured  from  England  a 
charter  for  "  William  and  Mary  College."  The  king  and 
queen,  from  their  private  purse,  gave  £2,000  toward  the 
new  enterprise.  The  English  government  gave  20,000  acres 
of  land,  one  penny  on  every  pound  of  tobacco  exported  from 
Maryland  and  Virginia,  and  all  fees  or  profits  arising  from 
the  office  of  surveyor-general.  The  same  year  an  export 
duty  on  skins  and  furs  was  levied  for  the  support  of  the 
college.  In  1718  £1,000  were  appropriated  by  the  General 
Assembly  for  the  education  of  "  ingenuous  scholars,  natives 
of  this  colony."  In  1726  the  General  Assembly  appro- 
priated £200  per  annum  for  twenty-one  years  out  of  a  tax 
of  one  penny  a  gallon  on  liquors.  The  proceeds  of  a  tax  on 
peddlers  was  likewise  set  aside  for  the  purpose  in  1759. 

In  1779  Thomas  Jefferson  and  George  Wythe,  who  had 
been  selected  to  revise  the  colonial  laws  into  a  code  suitable 
to  the  needs  of  a  new  State,  recommended  that  the  office  of 
surveyor-general  remain  a  part  of  the  college,  and  that  the 
fees  arising  from  the  office  be  retained  by  the  college  as  state 
aid.  This  recommendation  was  enacted  into  law  by  the 
General  Assembly.  The  idea  was  to  make  it  ultimately  a 
state  university;  but  when  the  University  of  Virginia  was 
established  at  Charlottesville  in  1818  this  act  was  repealed, 
and  the  separation  of  the  University  and  the  State  was 
complete. 

At  the  close  of  the  Revolutionary  War  the  twenty  thou- 
sand acres  of  land  owned  in  different  parts  of  the  State 
were  gradually  disposed  of,  and  the  proceeds,  amounting  to 
about  $150,000,  became  endowment.  During  the  Civil  War 
most  of  this  endowment  was  lost  by  investment  in  Con- 
federate bonds.  At  this  time  also  the  main  building  was 
turned  by  Federal  soldiers,  and  from  1865  to  1881  the 


62  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

college  was  maintained  only  by  a  financial  struggle;  from 
1881  to  1888  it  was  closed.1 

Relations  of  the  State  with  the  college  were  renewed  in 
1888.  From  that  time  until  1906  the  State  granted  a  sum 
annually  to  its  normal  department  for  men.  In  the  latter 
year  the  property,  including  a  small  endowment,  was  trans- 
ferred to  the  State ;  and  the  college  is  now  administered  by  a> 
board  of  ten  annual  visitors  who  are  appointed,  five  every 
two  years  for  a  period  of  four  years,  by  the  governor  of  the 
State.  As  many  state  students  as  there  are  representatives 
in  the  House  of  Delegates  may  be  elected  by  the  board  of 
visitors  upon  the  recommendation  of  the  division  super- 
intendent of  education  from  the  respective  districts  of  the- 
delegates.  These  students  are  exempted  from  tuition  fees,- 
and  receive  board,  light,  fuel,  and  laundry  for  $12  a  month. 
As  a  matter  of  practice,  any  student  living  within  the  State 
may  avail  himself  of  these  privileges  by  applying  to  the- 
president  of  the  college.  State  students  must  sign  a  pledge 
to  teach  in  the  public  schools  of  the  State  for  a  period  of  two 
years.  The  very  small  percentage  of  state  students  who- 
fail  to  fulfill  this  pledge  are  not  legally  proceeded  against, 
it  being  thought  inexpedient.  About  50  per  cent,  of  the 
students  are  pursuing  college  courses;  the  other  half  pursue 
courses  of  high  school  grade.  About  half  of  those  enrolled 
are  pursuing  the  teachers'  course  which  covers  thoroughly 
the  high  school  grades  and  the  equivalent  of  freshman 
and  sophomore  college  courses.  The  degrees  of  Bachelor 
of  Arts  and  Master  of  Arts  are  also  given.  The  state  ap- 
propriation for  1911  was  $40,000  for  support  and  $15,000 
for  improvements. 

University  of  Virginia. — In  the  year  1818,  through  the  in- 
fluence of  Thomas  Jefferson,  the  General  Assembly  appro- 
priated from  the  Literary  Fund  the  sum  of  $15,000  annually 
for  the  establishment  of  the  University  at  Charlottes vi lie,  a 

1  For  the  facts  in  the  above  four  paragraphs  the  writer  is  indebted' 
to  the  recent  interesting  book  on  Williamsburg  by  Lyon  G.  Tyler,, 
and  also  to  the  interesting  Contributions  to  the  Study  of  History  by 
H.  B.  Adams. 


Public  Education.  63 

healthful,  centrally  located  town  near  the  home  of  this  great 
patron  of  education.1  From  1818  to  1825  all  of  this  sum 
was  used  for  the  erection  of  buildings.  In  addition  to  this, 
three  $60,000  loans  were  obtained  from  the  Literary  Fund 
by  acts  of  the  General  Assembly.  In  1824  this  debt  of 
$180,000  was  cancelled.2  In  fact,  this  was  a  means  by 
which  the  promoters  built  more  extensively  than  the  General 
Assembly  would  have  agreed  to  when  the  loans  were  made. 
An  additional  sum  was  raised  by  private  subscriptions,  Jef- 
ferson, Madison,  and  Monroe  being  among  the  contributors. 

In  1825  the  University  opened  with  a  plant  which  had  cost 
about  $400,000  without  encumbrances,  and  with  a  $15,000 
grant  from  the  Literary  Fund.3  After  1869  this  sum  was 
paid  from  the  common  state  budget,  as  the  use  of  the  income 
of  the  Literary  Fund  had  been  restricted  to  the  common 
schools  by  the  constitution  of  that  year.4  In  1876  the  ap- 
propriation was  increased  to  $30,000;  in  1884  it  was  in- 
creased to  $40,000  on  condition  that  students  from  the  State 
be  charged  no  tuition ;  and  in  1906  it  was  raised  to  $75,000 
on  condition  that  the  university  fee  for  state  students  be 
reduced  from  $40  to  $10.  The  appropriation  in  1911  was 
$90,ooo.5 

Until  1904  the  government  of  the  University  was  different 
from  that  of  any  other  university  in  the  world.  The 
administration  was  vested  in  nine  visitors  appointed  by  the 
governor  of  the  State,  at  first  for  one  year,  afterwards  for 
four  years.  The  visitors  with  a  rector  elected  from  among 
themselves  met  annually  at  the  University,  and  decided  such 
questions  as  are  ordinarily  decided  by  a  president.  Subject 
to  this  general  direction  of  the  board  of  visitors,  the  affairs 
of  the  institution  were  administered  directly  by  the  faculty 

1  Acts,  1817,  c.  2. 
*Acts,  1824,  c.  7. 

3  Niles'  Register,  March  4,  1826. 

4  Constitution,  1869,  Art.  VIII,  Sec.  8. 

*  This  included  $10,000  for  the  support  of  the  hospital  and  $10,000 
for  interest  and  a  sinking  fund  on  a  $200,000  funded  building  debt 
which  pays  4  per  cent,  interest.  This  debt  was  contracted  for  new 
buildings  after  the  fire  in  1896.  The  University,  however,  has  an 
endowment  fund  of  $1,394,025. 


64  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

and  its  chairman,  the  latter  being  elected  by  the  faculty  for 
a  one-year  term,  though  he  was  often  reelected.  The  chair- 
man directly  discharged  the  duties  usually  devolving  upon  a 
president,  but  also  had  secretarial  duties  under  the  general 
direction  of  the  board  of  visitors. 

Jefferson  had  copied  this  system  from  European  schools, 
but  since  Virginia  had  no  minister  of  education  it  worked 
quite  differently  from  its  models.  The  system  broke  down 
because  the  board  of  visitors  could  not  perform  the  many 
duties  of  a  twentieth  century  president;  because  the  chair- 
man of  the  faculty,  who  was  also  a  teacher,  lacked  the  time 
for  his  duties,  even  if  there  was  to  be  found  a  teacher  who 
also  had  preeminent  administrative  ability;  also  because  a 
consistent  administrative  policy  was  impossible  when  it  was 
dependent  upon  the  views  of  a  faculty  or  board  whose  per- 
sonnel was  frequently  changing. 

In  1903  the  General  Assembly  authorized  the  board  of 
visitors  to  elect  a  president.  The  following  year  Edwin  A. 
Alderman,  formerly  president  of  Tulane  University,  was 
elected  first  president  of  the  University,  the  change  be- 
ing brought  about  long  after  it  was  needed  but  without 
friction.  The  term  of  office  for  the  president  and  members 
of  the  faculty  is  dependent  upon  good  behavior,  a  vote  of 
two  thirds  of  the  board  being  necessary  for  removal.  It 
has  been  Dr.  Alderman's  policy  to  refer  all  matters  pertain- 
ing to  courses  of  study  and  kindred  subjects  to  the  faculty 
much  as  was  done  under  the  old  system,  .and  he  has  always 
abided  by  their  decision.  The  leadership  of  a  progressive 
president  has  already  shown  great  results.  The  fourteen 
unit  entrance  requirement  has  been  established  and  en- 
forced ;  the  law  school  has  lengthened  its  course  from  two 
to  three  years ;  the  medical  school  has  been  much  improved  ; 
the  enrollment  has  grown;  the  endowment  has  more  than 
doubled;  and  the  annual  grant  has  been  increased.'  The 
interest  in  the  summer  school  has  greatly  increased,  the  at- 
tendance in  1911  being  1325,  the  greater  number  of  whom 
were  in  the  normal  department. 


Public  Education.  65 

Virginia  Military  Institute. — The  Virginia  Military  Insti- 
tute was  founded  in  the  year  1839.  The  state  arsenal  in 
Lexington  had  formerly  been  protected  by  a  body  of  paid 
soldiers,  but  it  was  proposed  that  it  be  guarded  by  young 
men  who  might  study  at  the  same  time.  Out  of  this  pro- 
posal grew  the  Virginia  Military  Institute,  a  strictly  scien- 
tific military  college,  known  as  the  "  West  Point  of  the 
South."1  West  Point  discipline  over  students  attending 
largely  at  their  own  expense  has  occasionally  become  a 
problem.  The  classes  are  closely  organized  according  to 
years;  and  on  two  occasions  the  form  of  insubordination 
has  been  to  break  barracks  on  New  Year's  eve  for  a  pyro- 
technic display  from  the  roof.  In  1905  the  insubordination 
was  in  the  form  of  an  ultimatum,  stating  that  the  class 
would  resign  unless  there  were  a  decided  change,  by  an 
appointed  day,  in  the  food.  In  January,  1911,  because  cer- 
tain cadet  officers  were  considered  over-zealous  in  their  dis- 
cipline, the  third  class  (sophomore),  to  annoy  these  officers, 
threw  loud  explosives  from  barracks.2 

In  1899  the  first  class  (senior)  was  suspended,  but  rein- 
stalled a  month  later.  The  insubordination  of  1905  resulted 
only  in  the  dismissal  of  nine  cadets.  In  1907  the  class  was 
retained  upon  very  hard  conditions.  In  1911  the  third  class 
(sophomore),  numbering  eighty-odd,  was  dismissed  almost 
to  a  man  and  not  reinstated.  The  precedents  set  in  1899, 
1905,  and  1907  were  hurtful,  and  the  support  given  the 
superintendent  of  the  school  by  the  board  of  visitors  in  1911 
is  much  to  be  commended.  Had  the  class  of  1899  been 

1  The  minimum  entrance  requirements  are  ten  units.  As  an  ex- 
ample of  the  military  and  technical  training  received,  we  read  that 
at  Fort  Leavenworth  in  1908  four  hundred  aspirants  for  military 
honors  took  the  preliminary  examination  for  the  post  of  second 
lieutenant  of  the  U.  S.  Army.  Only  thirty-six  passed.  Seven  of 
them  were  graduates  of  this  school,  although  only  eight  cadets  from 
the  Virginia  Military  Institute  took  the  examination  (Richmond 
Times  Dispatch,  January  16,  1909). 

"This  organized  insubordination  has  occurred  in  1880,  1899,  1905, 
1907,  and  1911. 

5 


66  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

summarily  dismissed  it  is  most  probable  that  the  insubordi- 
nation of  later  years  would  have  been  avoided.1 

The  board  of  visitors,  who  are  appointed  by  the  gover- 
nor, have  always  admitted  as  state  cadets,  with  free  board 
and  tuition,  at  least  fifty  young  men  between  sixteen  and 
twenty-five  years  of  age;  one  from  each  senatorial  district, 
and  eleven  at  large.  The  number  of  applicants  is  about  50 
per  cent,  greater  than  the  number  admitted.  For  several 
years  past  the  board  has  admitted  all  cadets  from  Virginia 
free  from  tuition.  The  saving  to  a  "state  cadet"  is  now 
$235  per  annum  or  $940  for  the  four  years.  In  con- 
sideration of  this  the  state  cadet,  after  graduation,  or 
even  after  two  years  of  residence,  must  teach  for  two  years 
in  a  Virginia  school;  or  else  he  must  pay  in  lieu  thereof 
$400  without  interest  in  four  annual  installments.  It  has 
been  proposed  that  those  who  serve  two  years  in  the  state 
militia  or  pursue  engineering  in  the  State  should  be  exempted 
from  the  payment  of  this  four  hundred  dollars.  In  1880  a 
law  was  passed  by  the  General  Assembly  of  Virginia  com- 
pelling the  superintendent  of  the  school  to  proceed  legally 
against  any  state  cadet  not  fulfilling  the  agreement.  The 
words  of  this  law  were  underscored  throughout,  which 
would  seem  to  indicate  that  the  author  drafted  it  with  an 
intense  feeling  that  the  State  was  being  defrauded  by  some 
cadets.  At  present  there  are  few  who  do  not  fulfill  their 
obligations,  and  it  is  not  thought  advisable  to  proceed  against 
them.2 

At  present  there  seems  to  be  little  justification  for  this  ex- 
penditure on  account  of  state  cadets.  In  1909,  after  the 
system  had  been  in  operation  for  seventy  years,  there  were 
only  nineteen  graduates  of  this  institution  teaching  or  act- 
ing as  principals  in  the  public  schools  of  the  State.  It  would 

1A  great  part  of  the  class  expelled  in  1911  were  exceptional  in 
scholarship  and  conduct.  The  large  majority  were  involved  to  shield 
the  few  who  are  insubordinate  by  nature.  If  one  fails  to  act  with 
his  class  he  is  to  a  certain  extent  ostracised;  so  it  results  that  a  large 
majority  of  exemplary  cadets  are  ruled  by  a  small  minority  of 
insubordinates. 

2  The  state  annuity  for  1911  was  $40,000. 


Public  Education.  67 

seem  that  a  better  plan  would  be  to  lend  state  cadets  money 
for  board,  uniforms,  and  books  (tuition  being  free  to  all 
from  Virginia),  without  interest  and  without  indorsement, 
payable  one  hundred  dollars  annually  after  graduation.  The 
names  of  such  as  do  not  pay  their  annual  notes  should  be 
published  in  the  annual  report  of  the  school  unless  the  cadet 
is  excused  by  the  board  of  visitors  for  good  reason,  sucbJ 
as  sickness.  By  thus  using  the  state  cadet  appropriation  a 
permanent  loan  fund  would  accumulate  which  in  a  com- 
paratively short  time  would  make  the  school  independent  of 
other  patronage.  This  plan  would  assist  in  discipline,  and 
would  extend  the  opportunity  of  an  education  to  a  much 
greater  number;  and  an  opportunity  is  all  that  any  young 
man  should  ask  of  the  State.  The  wisdom  of  this  last  sug- 
gestion, it  is  but  fair  to  say,  is  questioned  by  the  superintend- 
ent of  the  Institute. 

Schools  for  the  Deaf  and  Blind. — The  Virginia  School  for 
Deaf  and  Blind  was  established  at  Staunton  the  same  year 
as  the  Virginia  Military  Institute,  1839.  This  institution  is 
strictly  a  school,  none  being  retained  who  cannot  learn. 
Industrial  arts,  typewriting,  music,  and  other  occupations 
are  taught  the  blind.  This  institution  has  always  been  for 
whites  only,  but  in  1909  the  Virginia  School  for  the  Colored 
Deaf  and  Blind  was  established  at  Newport  News.  These 
schools  are  free  to  all  Virginians.  The  grant  in  1911  for 
the  support  of  the  former  was  $50,000;  for  the  latter, 
$15,000,  plus  $8,500  for  equipment. 

Virginia  Polytechnic  Institute. — In  1862  the  Congress  of 
the  United  States  appropriated  public  lands,  or  land-script, 
to  the  several  States  in  proportion  to  their  representation  in 
Congress,  for  the  establishment  of  departments  of  agricul- 
ture and  mechanical  arts.  The  conditions  of  the  gift  were 
that  the  students  take  military  training ;  that  the  land-script 
be  sold  and  the  proceeds  be  invested  in  safe  stocks  yielding 
not  less  than  5  per  cent.;  that  any  losses  of  principal  be 
replaced  by  the  State;  that  no  part  of  the  principal  be  in- 


68  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

vested  in  buildings.1  After  the  Civil  War  a  further  con- 
dition was  imposed,  requiring  a  just  portion  of  the  fund 
to  be  devoted  to  the  colored.  The  University  of  Virginia 
showed  very  little  interest  in  having  this  department  attached 
to  itself,  and  the  Virginia  Military  Institute  had  not  sufficient 
land  in  its  immediate  locality.  But  in  the  southwestern  sec- 
tion of  the  State  the  legislators  and  a  few  progressive  per- 
sons bestirred  themselves,  and  offered  the  Olin  Institute 
buildings  and  grounds  with  a  $20,000  bonus  from  the  county 
for  an  additional  building;  and  in  1872  the  Agricultural  and 
Mechanical  College  of  Virginia  opened  at  Blacksburg,  an 
inaccessible  village  in  a  fertile  section  of  Montgomery 
County. 

The  General  Assembly  ordered  the  state  board  of  educa- 
tion to  sell  the  land-script  and  to  invest  the  proceeds  in  Vir- 
ginia bonds  issued  since  the  adjustment  of  1871.  In  1877 
the  board  of  education  was  directed  to  turn  over  all  bonds 
resulting  from  the  sale  of  the  "  script "  to  the  second  auditor, 
who  was  to  cancel  the  same  and  enter  them  as  registered 
bonds.  On  this  $516,624,  6  per  cent,  interest,  or  $30,988 
per  annum,  has  always  been  allowed.  By  acts  of  Congress 
passed  in  1890  and  1907  lump  appropriations  were  made 
for  schools  of  this  type,  which  in  1913  will  aggregate 
$75,000  per  annum.  But  of  this  $105,988  annuity  one  third 
must  go  to  Hampton  Normal  and  Industrial  Institute  for 
the  colored  race,  a  non-state  school  which  gives  excellent 
normal  and  agricultural  courses.2 

By  acts  of  Congress  in  1887  and  1906,  $30,000  per 
annum  has  been  granted  each  state  for  agricultural  experi- 
mentation.3 In  1888  the  General  Assembly  of  Virginia 
made  an  experimental  station  a  part  of  the  Agricultural  and 

1  Act  of  July  2,  1862,  ch.  130,  12  Stat.  L. 

1  The  governor  appoints  visitors  to  this  school,  but  the  superin- 
tendent is  selected  by  a  non-state  board.  This  school,  which  has 
done  so  much  for  the  colored  of  the  State  and  the  South,  is  sup- 
ported by  Northern  philanthropy.  It  has  had  two  noble  super- 
intendents. 

*  This  Virginia  Experimental  Station  is  under  the  control  of  a 
committee  of  the  same  board  of  visitors  that  controls  the  school. 


Public  Education.  69 

Mechanical  College  of  Virginia.  To  this  $30,000  the  state 
has  added  $5000  for  the  publication  and  circulation  of 
bulletins  to  be  sent  to  all  newspapers  of  the  State  and  to 
all  farmers  who  apply.  In  1910  the  State  granted  the  school 
$60,000  for  support  in  addition  to  the  above  Federal  funds.1 
The  board  of  visitors  is  composed  of  the  president  of  the 
board  of  agriculture,  the  superintendent  of  public  instruc- 
tion, and  eight  men  appointed  by  the  governor  of  the  State 
from  farmers,  mechanics,  and  graduates  of  the  school. 

A  number  of  students  equal  to  four  times  the  number  of 
members  of  the  House  of  Delegates,  or  about  four  hundred, 
apportioned  in  the  same  manner,  have  the  privilege  of  at- 
tending the  school  without  charge  for  tuition,  or  use  of 
laboratories  and  public  buildings.  According  to  law,  stu- 
dents should  be  appointed  by  the  public  school  trustees  of 
the  delegate's  district;  but  in  practice  any  student  residing 
in  the  State  can  avail  himself  of  these  privileges  by  apply- 
ing to  the  president  of  the  college.  The  president  is  making 
an  earnest  effort  to  raise  the  entrance  requirements,  with 
gradual  success.  The  minimum  requirements  are  now  from 
eight  to  ten  units,  though  any  farmer  may  enter  the  six 
weeks'  practical  course  offered  each  winter. 

State  Normal  Schools. — The  Virginia  Normal  and  In- 
dustrial Institute  (colored),  for  males  and  females,  was 
established  at  Petersburg  in  1882,  while  the  Readjuster 
party  was  in  control  of  the  State.  The  school  fared  best 
while  this  party  was  in  power,  but  has  always  received  an 
annual  grant,  which  is  now  $20,000.  Students  are  admitted 
on  the  same  conditions  as  at  the  Virginia  Polytechnic  Insti- 
tute. When  it  was  established  and  during  its  early  days 
colored  men  were  on  the  board  of  visitors,  but  these  have 
been  replaced  by  a  most  excellent  board  of  whites  who  are 
in  full  sympathy  with  the  education  of  the  colored.  The 
school  is  quite  well  managed  by  a  colored  superintendent. 

1  In  addition  to  this  the  State  appropriated  $6750  to  the  school  for 
interest  and  a  sinking  fund  on  a  building  debt  of  $115,000;  $6000  for 
a  school  of  mines;  and  $5000  for  crop  experimentation. 


yo  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

The  State  Female  Normal  School  at  Farmville  was  opened 
in  1884.  Until  1909  this  was  the  only  state  school  of  higher 
or  special  training  admitting  white  women.  According  to 
law,  each  county  and  city  is  entitled  to  free  tuition  and  room 
and  board  at  a  very  low  figure  for  one  student,  provided 
each  county  or  city  have  in  the  school,  free  from  tuition, 
as  many  students  as  it  has  delegates  in  the  General  Assem- 
bly. Each  state  student  must  give  evidence  of  her  intention 
to  teach  for  two  years  in  the  schools  of  the  State.  In  prac- 
tice, any  young  woman  from  Virginia  can  avail  herself  of 
these  privileges.  The  entrance  requirements  at  the  Farm- 
ville Normal  School  have  of  necessity  been  very  low.  Pre- 
vious to  1909,  students  could  enter  from  the  grades;  in 
1910  the  policy  was  to  admit  those  who  had  exhausted  the 
public  school  facilities  at  their  homes;  in  1911  the  pre- 
requisite to  entrance  was  one  year  in  a  high  school.  The 
requirements  for  graduation  are  a  complete  high  school 
course  plus  two  years  of  professional  training. 

A  kindergarten  and  graded  school,  composed  of  several 
hundred  town  children,  are  well  taught  by  advanced  stu- 
dents. High  school  girls  of  Farmville  also  attend  this  school 
by  paying  a  nominal  tuition.  It  would  seem  to  the  writer 
that  only  those  taking  strictly  normal  work  should  be  ad- 
mitted for  less  than  private  school  rates  of  tuition,  as  there 
is  no  reason  why  the  State  should  totally  support  the  high 
school  of  any  locality.  Also,  it  is  an  injustice  to  the  boys  of 
the  community,  as  the  arrangement  has  prevented  the  proper 
development  of  a  city  high  school.  This  school  is  develop- 
ing a  very  good  kindergarten  training  department,  and  it 
would  seem  that  the  other  state  normal  schools,  for  the 
present  at  least,  should  not  attempt  to  develop  this  depart- 
ment, as  it  would  be  wasteful  duplication. 

The  Harrisonburg  Normal  and  Industrial  School  was 
opened  in  1909.  It  is  for  young  women,  but  men  are  admitted 
to  the  classes  during  one  summer  term.  Practically  any 
young  woman  from  Virginia  desiring  to  teach  can  enter 
here  on  the  same  conditions  as  at  Farmville,  except  that  two 


Public  Education.  71 

years  of  high  school  preparation  are  required.  The  course 
consists  of  a  four-year  normal  course  with  emphasis  upon 
domestic  science,  household  manual  training,  and  gardening. 
A  somewhat  unique  feature  of  this  school  is  the  system  of 
four  terms.  The  school  is  open  eleven  weeks  during  the 
summer,  so  that  by  taking  short  vacations  it  is  possible  to 
save  one  year  in  completing  the  full  course;  and  teachers 
from  short  term  country  schools  can  annually  take  two  of 
the  four  terms.  The  system  shows  progress  and  is  work- 
ing excellently. 

There  is  no  training-school  directly  connected  with  the 
normal  school,  but  all  seniors  get  experience  in  the  Har- 
risonburg  Graded  School,  which  is  one  of  the  best  in  the 
State.  The  Harrisonburg  High  School  also,  unlike  that  at 
Farmville,  was  one  of  the  very  best  when  the  State  Normal 
School  was  established;  therefore  high  school  girls  from 
the  town  do  not  attend  the  Normal  School.  As  Harrison- 
burg  has  two  graded  schools  for  whites  it  would  seem  well 
if  one  could  be  gradually  turned  over  to  advanced  normal 
students.  Patrons  are  apt  to  think  that  their  children  are 
being  experimented  upon,  but  in  fact  children  are  better 
taught  in  a  well-conducted  training  school  than  in  any  other, 
as  the  teachers  are  under  the  constant  supervision  and  direc- 
tion of  pedagogical  experts. 

The  Fredericksburg  Normal  and  Industrial  School  was 
opened  in  1911.  It  is  similar  to  the  Harrisonburg  Normal 
School  except  that  it  has  not  the  summer  session  and  that 
its  only  entrance  requirement  is  that  an  applicant  shall  have 
exhausted  the  public  school  facilities  offered  in  his  home 
town.  The  Radford  Normal  and  Industrial  Institute  is 
expected  to  open  in  1912,  and  this  school  will  be  somewhat 
similar  to  the  Harrisonburg  and  Fredericksburg  Normal 
Schools.  It  seems  that  until  women  are  admitted  at  the 
University  of  Virginia  one  of  the  state  normal  schools 
should  have  a  department  for  training  high  school  teachers, 
requiring  a  full  high  school  course  as  a  prerequisite  to 


72  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

entrance.     This  would  not  take  the  place  of  a  full  college 
course,  but  would  be  a  step  in  the  proper  direction. 

In  1911  the  above  named  female  normal  schools  for 
whites  received  from  the  State  a  total  of  $100,000  for  sup- 
port and  $150,000  for  permanent  improvements.  The  stu- 
dents are  expected  to  pay  a  sufficient  amount  to  cover  the 
cost  of  maintaining  the  mess-hall  and  paying  for  laundry, 
light,  and  heat.  For  these  items  the  Farmville  and  Fred- 
ericksburg  Normal  Schools  charge  $15  a  month;  the  school 
at  Harrisonburg  charges  $14.  William  and  Mary  College 
has  been  charging  only  $12,  according  to  the  letter  of  the 
state  law.  But  to  do  this  the  mess-hall  fund  had  to  be 
supplemented  from  the  state  annuity.  All  of  the  state  nor- 
mal schools  are  controlled  by  boards  of  visitors  appointed 
by  the  governor  of  the  State ;  and  each  of  these  boards  has 
selected  a  practical,  enthusiastic  school  man  as  president. 
Another  inexpensive  but  efficient  state  normal  school  is 
needed  for  the  colored  somewhere  in  the  vicinity  of  Lynch- 
burg.  There  is  no  greater  defect  in  the  administration  of 
schools  in  Virginia  than  that  of  having  one  third  of  the 
population  taught  by  teachers  the  large  majority  of  whom 
are  in  no  sense  prepared  for  the  work. 

The  normal  departments  in  twenty-four  high  schools  have 
been  described  under  the  head  of  high  schools.  In  addition 
to  all  the  normal  schools  mentioned  there  have  been  recently 
started  fifteen  one-month  state  summer  normal  schools  con- 
ducted throughout  the  State,  with  an  attendance  of  more 
than  three  thousand,  in  addition  to  the  thirteen  hundred  at 
the  University  Summer  Normal  School.  Each  of  these  is 
in  charge  of  a  conductor  appointed  by  the  state  superintend- 
ent of  public  instruction,  who  also  selects  the  places  for 
holding  the  schools.  These  summer  normal  schools  are  sup- 
ported by  an  appropriation  from  the  state  school  fund, 
supplemented  by  additional  sums  from  the  cities  and  coun- 
ties in  which  the  schools  are  conducted. 

The  recent  growth  of  normal  schools  in  Virginia  is  one  of 
the  most  striking  improvements  of  the  Virginia  public  school 


Public  Education.  73 

system ;  but  unless  the  much  needed  legislation  which  estab- 
lished these  schools  is  supplemented  by  additional  legisla- 
tion which  will  raise  the  salaries  of  teachers,  the  State  will 
find  itself  repeating  the  mistake  of  the  past  when  it  spent 
large  sums  on  colleges  and  provided  no  public  free  high 
schools  to  prepare  pupils  for  the  colleges.  The  result  was 
that  an  unduly  large  proportion  of  the  college  students  were 
from  other  states.  Unless  salaries  are  in  some  manner 
raised,  those  whom  the  State  will  train  will  go  elsewhere 
to  teach  on  better  salaries.  They  can  be  held  in  the  State 
by  a  minimum  salary  law  applying  to  all  teachers  holding 
collegiate  or  professional  certificates.  Two  objections  may 
be  raised  to  this.  First,  some  will  object  to  applying  the 
minimum  salary  law  to  colored  teachers.  The  reply  is  that 
there  is  no  greater  waste  of  school  funds  than  the  employ- 
ment of  inefficient  teachers  even  if  they  can  be  had  at  low 
salaries.  A  professional  teacher,  white  or  colored,  is  cheap 
at  any  reasonable  price.  Another  objection  is  that  a  mini- 
mum salary  for  teachers  holding  professional  certificates 
would  cause  trustees  to  accept  teachers  without  professional 
certificates.  The  writer  does  not  believe  this;'  but  if  the 
minimum  salary  law  should  have  this  effect,  all  schools  of  a 
certain  standard  could  be  required,  under  penalty  of  forfeit- 
ing state  aid,  to  employ  teachers  with  collegiate  or  profes- 
sional certificates. 

Other  State  Aid. — The  Medical  College  of  Virginia  re- 
ceives an  annual  grant  of  $5,000  from  the  State,  though  it 
is  not  a  state  school.  To  obviate  the  constitutional  prohi- 
bition against  supporting  non-state  schools,  a  board  of 
visitors  is  appointed  for  the  school.  In  addition  to  the  sup- 
port given  the  above  institution  and  the  state  schools  already 
mentioned,  the  State  annually  gives  indirectly  $63,914  to 
three  state  and  seventeen  non-state  schools.1  In  1902  an  act 
of  the  General  Assembly  allowed  "  schools  and  colleges  "  hold- 
ing Virginia  state  bonds  to  continue  receiving  the  original 
rate  of  6  per  cent,  interest  as  they  had  always  done,  though 

1  Report  of  the  Second  Auditor,  1910. 


74  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

all  other  bonds  had  been  refunded  at  3  per  cent,  in  1892. 
If  these  bonds  held  by  schools  produced  only  3  per  cent., 
the  rate  paid  on  all  other  state  bonds,  the  State  would  pay 
$63,914  less  interest  on  the  state  debt;  therefore  the  State 
practically  appropriates  this  amount  to  these  schools.1  The 
constitution  of  1902  prohibits  the  State,  county,  or  city  from 
appropriating  to  a  non-public  school,  but  makes  a  specific 
exception  in  favor  of  this  indirect  appropriation.2 

In  1911  the  State  spent  on  these  permanent  state  schools 
of  higher  or  normal  education  for  all  purposes  between 
$600,000  and  $700,000.  In  addition  to  this,  these  schools, 
excluding  those  for  the  deaf  and  blind  and  the  normal 
schools,  may  each  draw  from  the  state  treasury  annually  a 
sum  equal  to  i  per  cent.  *kf  its  annuity ;  this  money  is  used 
as  a  permanent  loan  fund  for  deserving  scholars,  who  re- 
ceive sums  not  exceeding  $100  each  for  any  one  session 
upon  which  they  pay  4  per  cent,  interest.3 

Discussion. — The  Virginia  state  schools  of  higher  edu- 
cation lack  both  coordination  and  subordination.  Their 
work  is  not  coordinate,  does  not  properly  fit  together,  be- 
cause there  is  nobody  to  make  it  fit  together.  When  there 
were  only  a  few  state  schools,  and  comparatively  few  de- 
partments of  government  to  be  administered,  the  governor 
had  some  opportunity  to  determine  school  policy  through 
the  boards  he  appointed,  if  he  were  inclined  to  do  so.  Today 
this  is  impossible  for  a  busy  governor;  and  if  education, 
which  consumes  nearly  one  half  of  the  State's  revenue,4  is 

1  In  this  calculation  we  have  taken  into  consideration  that  the 
Federal  act  giving  the  "  land-script  fund  "  to  the  states  for  agricul- 
tural and  mechanical  colleges  requires  the  payment  of  at  least  5 
per  cent,  interest.  That  is,  this  $63,914  includes  $5181  or  i  per  cent, 
of  the  $516,624  in  the  land-script  fund,  the  difference  between  5  per 
cent,  which  the  State  is  obliged  to  pay  and  6  per  cent,  which  it  does 
pay. 

a  Constitution,  1902,  Art.  9,  Sec.  142. 

8  Acts,  1908,  c.  284. 

*  In  1909  46  per  cent,  of  the  state  revenue  was  spent  on  education, 
including  state  money  spent  on  buildings  and  improvements.  This 
figure  applies  only  to  state  revenues.  Through  local  taxation  a  sum 
almost  as  large  was  raised  for  public  schools  (Mill  Tax  Report  of 
the  Virginia  Education  Commission,  p.  7). 


Public  Education.  75 

ever  to  be  permanently  systematized  and  administered  ac- 
cording to  economic  principles,  a  commissioner  of  education, 
appointed  by  the  governor,  with  a  salary  which  will  attract 
talent  and  experience,  is  essential.  No  system  can  perform 
its  purpose  without  a  single  head;  yet  state  education  in 
Virginia  has  ten  heads,  no  one  of  which  has  the  promotion 
of  state  schools  as  its  prime  interest.  Reference  is  made 
to  the  nine  boards  for  state  schools  and  the  state  board  of 
education  for  primary  and  secondary  education.  As  a 
result,  three  state  schools  offer  courses  in  engineering,  half 
of  the  state  schools  are  retarding  the  development  of  high 
schools  by  robbing  them  of  pupils  who  could  as  well  pursue 
high  school  work  at  home;  school  supplies  are  purchased 
separately  by  the  schools  which  could  be  had  more  cheaply 
if  bought  in  larger  quantities.  Examples  could  be  multiplied. 

In  regard  to  the  engineering  courses  at  three  schools,  it  has 
been  pointed  out  that  the  Virginia  Military  Institute  is  pri- 
marily to  develop  health  and  character  rather  than  to  offer  the 
.specialized  course  of  the  average  college;  that  the  Virginia 
Polytechnic  Institute  is  a  school  for  practical  engineering; 
that  the  University  of  Virginia  emphasizes  theoretical  gradu- 
ate courses.  Yet  it  seems  that  at  least  two  of  these  schools 
could  have  been  combined  to  the  economic  advantage  of  the 
State.  It  would  seem  that  the  shops  at  the  Polytechnic  In- 
stitute would  be  helpful  at  the  University;  and  that  the 
advanced  theory  at  the  University  would  be  inspiring  at 
the  Polytechnic  Institute.  At  least  the  existing  four  female 
normal  schools  for  whites  are  needed,  but  unless  these 
schools  are  coordinated  by  a  commissioner  of  education  a 
loss  will  result.  Instead  of  delegating  kindergarten  work 
to  .one,  manual  and  domestic  arts  to  another,  and  a  depart- 
ment for  high  school  teachers  to  the  third,  each  will  natu- 
rally endeavor  to  develop  all  three. 

The  existence  of  five  state  normal  schools  whose  entrance 
requirements  vary  from  no  high  school  work  to  two  years 
of  high  school  work  results  in  the  State's  paying  for  high 
•.school  work  which  should  be  supported  by  the  localities ;  and 


76  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

this  will  be  done  by  the  localities,  at  a  moderate  cost  to  the 
State,  if  the  latter  appropriates  conditionally  toward  the 
support  of  high  schools.  In  fact  the  University  of  Virginia 
is  the  only  state  school  which  requires  a  full  high  school 
course  as  a  prerequisite  to  entrance.  The  Military  Institute 
and  the  Polytechnic  Institute  are  both  striving  for  this  goal ; 
but  each  knows  that  its  attendance  will  fall  off  when  it  raises 
the  standard,  which  would  make  a  bad  showing  in  the  eyes 
of  the  public.  A  strong  commissioner  of  education  could 
set  this  standard  with  immunity  to  himself.  Of  course  non- 
state  colleges  might  continue  robbing  high  schools,  but  this 
would  not  be  at  state  expense;  and  there  are  constitutional 
means  by  which  this  could  be  prevented  if  it  were  the  busi- 
ness of  any  one  man  to  have  such  laws  enacted  and  enforced. 

There  is  a  considerable  sentiment  in  favor  of  state  pro- 
vision for  the  collegiate  and  university  education  of  women. 
It  is  a  fact  that  a  large  majority  of  high  school  graduates 
are  girls,  and  that  the  number  of  women  teaching  in  our 
high  schools  is  becoming  larger  every  year.  At  present  the 
State  cannot  afford  an  additional  school  plant;  but  if  a 
normal  course  for  men  were  offered  at  the  University,  Wil- 
liam and  Mary  College  might  be  turned  over  to  women. 
Here  both  an  advanced  normal  course  and  a  course  leading 
to  the  degree  of  Bachelor  of  Arts  could  be  offered ;  but  for 
the  courses  leading  to  the  degree  of  Master  of  Arts  or 
Doctor  of  Philosophy  there  should  be  no  objection  to  admit- 
ting women  at  the  University. 

The  Virginia  Education  Commission  has  recently  issued 
an  interesting  tentative  report1  on  a  proposed  mill  tax  for 
the  educational  "  system  "  of  the  State.  The  report  recom- 
mends that  for  the  support  of  elementary  schools,  high 
schools,  normal  schools,  and  institutions  of  higher  instruc- 
tion there  be  set  aside  from  the  annual  revenues  of  the  State 
a  sum  equivalent  to  two  and  one  third  mills  on  the  taxable 

1  This  report  was  prepared  by  the  secretary  of  the  commission, 
Charles  G.  Maphis,  who  has  given  much  helpful  data  to  the  writer  for 
the  preparation  of  this  section. 


Public  Education.  77 

property  of  Virginia  from  which  the  school  revenue  is  now 
derived,  which  would  be  in  lieu  of  the  present  school  tax 
and  all  the  regular  annual  appropriations  for  maintenance 
heretofore  made  for  this  purpose  from  the  state  treasury, 
except  the  capitation  tax  and  the  proceeds  of  the  Literary 
Fund. 

The  report  shows  that  sixteen  States  have  adopted  this 
method  of  support  for  one  or  more  of  their  educational 
institutions,  and  twenty-one  out  of  eighty-three  universi- 
ties and  other  institutions  of  higher  education  are  supported 
in  whole  or  in  part  by  a  mill  tax.  The  arguments  advanced 
for  the  mill  tax  are  that  it  permits  a  fixed  policy ;  that  reve- 
nues keep  a  proper  pace  with  wealth ;  that  it  provides  staple 
support  in  times  of  financial  depression ;  that  it  prevents 
undignified  lobbying  at  the  legislature  by  college  presidents ; 
that  it  saves  time  and  annoyance  to  legislators  and  prevents 
"  log-rolling  "  and  "  wire  pulling  " ;  and  that  it  adds  to  the 
self-respect  of  school  men.  The  Education  Commission  will 
make  a  report  to  the  biennial  session  of  the  General  As- 
sembly of  1912,  but  expects  to  continue  its  work  for  an 
additional  two  years  in  its  efforts  to  bring  about  greater 
coordination  in  the  school  system  of  Virginia. 


CHAPTER   II. 

THE  ELECTORATE  AND  ELECTIONS. 

The  Electorate. — Even  in  colonial  days  suffrage  was  more 
extensive  in  Virginia  than  in  England,  but  as  late  as  1824 
Jefferson  estimated  that  a  majority  of  freemen  in  Virginia 
were  excluded  from  the  franchise.  From  1776  to  1850 
there  was  a  light  property  qualification;  and  from  1850  to 
1869  every  white  male  citizen  of  the  Commonwealth  twenty- 
one  years  of  age,  who  had  been  a  resident  of  the  State  for 
two  years  and  of  the  county  or  city  for  twelve  months, 
could  vote.  The  constitution  of  1869  extended  the  suffrage 
to  every  male  citizen  of  the  United  States  twenty-one  years 
of  age,  thereby  including  negroes ;  and  reduced  the  period  of 
residence  to  one  year  in  the  State  and  three  months  in  the 
county  or  city. 

From  1877  to  1882,  however,  the  payment  of  a  one  dollar 
capitation  tax  was  made  a  prerequisite  to  voting.1  There 
were  two  motives  for  this  capitation  tax;  first,  to  produce 
revenue;2  and  second,  to  restrict  the  negro  vote.  The 
restriction  upon  both  the  white  and  the  colored  vote,  and 
especially  upon  the  latter,  would  have  been  much  greater 
than  it  was  had  the  voter  been  left  to  pay  his  own  tax.  But 
during  this  period  the  Republicans  and  Readjusters  were 
making  successful  attacks  upon  the  Democrats;  and  since 
the  former  were  receiving  more  assistance  from  Federal 
office-holders  and  the  national  political  fund,  they  could 
afford  to  pay  delinquent  capitation  taxes  of  the  negroes  with 

1  The  amendment  was  finally  approved  by  Acts,  1876-77,  c.  271 ; 
repealed  by  Acts,  1881-82,  c.  78,  which  authorized  the  governor  to 
proclaim  it  repealed  upon  a  vote  of  the  majority  in  the  November 
election.  From  1872  to  1877  no  child  could  attend  a  public  school 
whose  father,  if  alive,  a  resident,  and  not  a  pauper,  had  not  paid 
the  last  capitation  tax  assessed  against  him  (Acts,  1871-72;  1876-77, 
c.  38). 

See  Capitation  Tax  in  chapter  on  Finances. 

78 


The  Electorate  and  Elections.  79 

more  ease  than  the  Democrats  could  pay  those  of  the  de- 
linquent whites;  and  thus,  when  the  amendment  for  the 
repeal  of  this  prerequisite  to  voting  was  submitted,  the 
Democrats  seemed  to  have  made  very  little  opposition.  In 
some  cases  the  county  treasurer  would  hand  over  a  batch  of 
receipts  for  capitation  taxes  which  had  never  been  paid. 
Other  treasurers  with  more  of  the  mercenary  spirit  would 
furnish  the  receipts  on  condition  that  the  politician  would 
pay  for  such  as  he  used.  This  tax  could  be  paid  as  late  as 
the  night  before  the  election.  This  prerequisite  to  voting 
was  abolished  in  1882,  while  the  Readjusters  and  Re- 
publicans were  in  power. 

By  the  end  of  the  nineteenth  century  the  negroes  generally 
realized  that  they  could  not  be  elected  to  office ;  and  in  the 
thirty-odd  counties  where  negroes  were  in  the  majority  it 
was  almost  as  well  known  that  they  could  not  elect  the  man 
of  their  choice.  The  election  machinery  was  in  the  hands 
of  the  whites,  and  if  the  negroes  actually  cast  the  majority 
of  ballots  for  one  of  their  own  race,  he  was  "  counted  out " 
by  the  judges  of  election.  But  they  continued  to  be  irre- 
sponsible tools,  usually  in  the  hands  of  the  more  corrupt 
candidates.  This  was  especially  shown  in  liquor  local 
option  elections. 

The  fraudulent  control  of  elections  became  a  habit,  and  it 
was  used  to  a  considerable  extent  against  whites  as  well  as 
against  negroes.  The  condition  was  most  unsatisfactory, 
and  when  it  was  observed  that  other  Southern  States  had 
practically  eliminated  the  negro  vote  by  legal  means,  the 
demand  for  a  reformed  electorate  in  Virginia  became  the 
most  influential  plea  for  a  constitutional  convention.  When 
the  Constitutional  Convention  of  1901-1902  met,  it  con- 
sidered the  question  of  suffrage,  from  time  to  time,  for  more 
than  twelve  months.  The  majority  of  delegates  from  the 
black  belt  desired  to  disfranchise  practically  all  negroes, 
while  those  from  the  northern  and  western  sections  of  the 
State  desired  to  save  all  whites,1  The  result  was  a  com- 

*The  Democratic  state  convention  which  had  proposed  that  a  con- 
stitutional convention  would  be  called  had  made  a  party  pledge  that 
no  white  man  should  be  disfranchised. 


8o  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

promise;  but  the  franchise  was  much  restricted  by  the  re- 
quirements of  longer  residence,  a  capitation  tax  as  a  pre- 
requisite, and  an  educational  test. 

However,  by  a  special  "white  carry-all"  permanent 
registration  to  extend  through  1902  and  1903,  the  following 
male  citizens  of  the  United  States,  twenty-one  years  of  age. 
who  had  resided  in  the  State  two  years  and  in  the  county, 
city,  or  town  for  one  year,  were  allowed  to  register  upon 
the  permanent  roll: 

"First.  A  person  who,  prior  to  the  adoption  of  this  Con- 
stitution, served  in  time  of  war  in  the  army  or 
navy  of  the  United  States,  of  the  Confederate 
States,  or  any  state  of  the  United  States  or  of  the 
Confederate  States ;  or, 
Second.  A  son  of  any  such  person ;  or, 

Third.  A  person  who  owns  property,  upon  which,  for  the 
year  next  preceding  that  in  which  he  offers  to 
register,  state  taxes  aggregating  at  least  one  dollar 
have  been  paid ;  or, 

Fourth.  A  person  able  to  read  any  section  of  this  Con- 
stitution submitted  to  him  by  the  officers  of  regis- 
tration and  to  give  a  reasonable  explanation  of  the 
same;  or,  if  unable  to  read  such  section,  able  to 
understand  and  give  a  reasonable  explanation 
thereof  when  read  to  him  by  the  officers." 

Since  the  first  of  January,  1904,  every  citizen  of  the 
United  States,  twenty-one  years  of  age,  two  years  resident 
in  the  State,  and  one  year  resident  in  the  county,  city,  or 
town,  has  registered  or  may  register,  provided: 

"  First.  That  he  has  personally  paid  the  proper  officer  all 
state  poll  taxes  assessed  or  assessable  against  him, 
under  this  or  the  former  Constitution,  for  the  three 
years  next  preceding  that  in  which  he  offers  to 
register;  or,  if  he  come  of  age  at  such  time  that 
no  poll  tax  shall  have  been  assessable  against  him 
for  the  year  preceding  the  year  in  which  he  offers 


The  Electorate  and  Elections. 


81 


to  register,  has  paid  one  dollar  and  fifty  cents,  in 
satisfaction  of  the  first  year's  poll  tax  assessable 
against  him;  and, 

Second.  That  unless  physically  unable,  he  makes  applica- 
tion to  register  in  his  own  handwriting,  without 
aid,  suggestion,  or  memorandum,  in  the  presence 
of  the  registration  officers,  stating  thereon  his 
name,  age,  date  and  place  of  birth,  residence  and 
occupation  at  the  time  and  for  the  two  years  next 
preceding,  and  whether  he  has  previously  voted, 
and,  if  so,  the  state,  county,  and  precinct  in  which 
he  voted  last;  and, 

Third.  That  he  answer  on  oath  any  and  all  questions 
effecting  his  qualifications  as  an  elector,  submitted 
to  him  by  the  officers  of  registration,  which  ques- 
tions, and  his  answers  thereto,  shall  be  reduced  to 
writing,  certified  by  the  said  officers,  and  preserved 
as  a  part  of  their  official  records."1 

Every  person,   except  veterans   of  the   Civil   War,   must 

"personally  pay2  at  least  six  months  prior  to  the  election,3 

1  The  following  classes,  somewhat  more  extensive  than  in  previous 
constitutions,  are  excluded  from  suffrage:  idiots,  insane,  paupers; 
persons  convicted  of  crime  and  disqualified  before  the  adoption  of 
the  constitution;  persons  convicted  after  the  adoption  of  the  new 
constitution,  of  treason,  felony,  bribery,  petit  larceny,  obtaining 
money  or  property  on  false  pretenses,  embezzlement,  forgery,  or 
perjury;  duelists  and  their  assistants;  Federal  soldiers  and  marines 
unless  citizens  of  the  State  previous  to  being  stationed  therein ; 
inmates  of  a  charitable  institution;  students  in  an  institution  of 
learning.  That  is,  a  student  is  not  regarded  as  having  either  gained 
or  lost  a  residence,  as  to  the  right  of  suffrage,  by  reason  of  his 
location  or  sojourn  in  such  institution. 

*In  Tilton  v.  Harmon  (109  Va.,  503)  "personally  pay"  is  con- 
strued to  mean  that  it  may  be  paid  by  check,  or  it  may  be  "  paid 
with  the  citizen's  money  sent  to  the  treasurer  by  a  member  of  his 
family,  by  his  clerk,  or  other  duly  authorized  agent,  and  perhaps 
there  are  other  ways  by  which  the  money  could  be  paid  to  the 
treasurer." 

3  An  Act  of  1908  (c.  73)  has  been  held  constitutional  which  pro- 
vides that  in  a  special  or  local  option  election  held  between  January 
i  and  the  second  Tuesday  in  June  any  person  may  vote  who  has  paid 
his  capitation  taxes  six  months  before  the  second  Tuesday  in  June; 
and  between  the  second  Tuesday  in  June  and  December  31  any 
person  may  vote  who  is  entitled  to  vote  in  the  general  election 
on  the  Tuesday  after  the  first  Monday  in  November. 
6 


82  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

all  state  poll  taxes  assessed  or  assessable  against  him  .  .  . 
during  the  three  years  next  preceding  that  in  which  he 
offers  to  vote." 

Registration. — The  registration  and  election  machinery 
has  been  in  the  hands  of  the  courts  or  the  General  Assembly. 
Previous  to  1884  a  registrar  for  each  precinct  was  appointed 
by  the  county  or  city  judge.  The  three  judges  of  election 
for  each  precinct  were  likewise  appointed  by  the  county 
judge,  but  the  clerks  of  election  were  selected  by  the  judges 
of  election.  Since  1884,  county  and  city  electoral  boards,1 
composed  of  three  members,  have  appointed  registrars,2 
judges  of  election,  and  clerks  of  election. 

The  registrars  sit  twice  a  year  to  register  new  voters,  but 
one  may  be  registered  at  any  time  during  the  year.  Five 
days  before  each  sitting,  and  also  on  the  day  of  election, 
the  registrar  must  post  at  the  place  of  voting  a  list  of 
persons  registered.  Separate  registration  books  for  whites 
and  negroes  are  furnished  by  the  secretary  of  the  Common- 
wealth. The  county  or  city  clerk  of  the  court  must  keep 
for  inspection  a  list  of  registered  voters ;  and  he  must  keep 
a  separate  list  of  those  who  registered  before  1904,  as  these 
persons  are  entitled  to  certain  privileges.3 

Five  months  before  each  regular  election  the  county  treas- 
urer must  send  to  the  clerk  of  the  circuit  court  of  the 
county  or  clerk  of  the  corporation  court  of  the  city,  a  list 
of  electors  who  have  paid  their  capitation  taxes*  not  later 

1From  1884  until  1894  these  electoral  boards  were  selected  every 
two  years,  and  from  1894  until  1904  every  four  years,  by  a  joint 
resolution  of  the  General  Assembly.  Since  1904  the  electoral  boards 
have  been  appointed,  one  each  year  for  three  years,  by  the  circuit 
or  corporation  court. 

2  Special  registrars  were  appointed  by  the  Constitutional  Conven- 
tion of  1902  for  the  special  registration  of  1902  and  1903. 

8  The  permanent  lists  can  always  be  found,  but  registrars  have 
been  careless  in  returning  lists  of  those  who  have  registered  since 
1903,  for  which  reason  the  only  way  to  learn  the  total  registration 
of  the  State  would  be  through  several  thousand  registrars.  The 
number  of  poll-taxes  paid  is  some  indication ;  but  veterans  are  not 
required  to  pay  a  poll-tax  as  a  prerequisite  to  voting,  and  illiterate 
negroes  who  have  acquired  a  small  piece  of  realty  since  1903  are 
compelled  to  pay  poll-taxes  though  they  cannot  vote. 

*This  tax  is  $1.50  annually. 


The  Electorate  and  Elections.  83 

than  six  months  prior  to  such  election  for  the  three  years 
next  preceding  the  year  in  which  such  election  is  held.  The 
clerk  has  the  sheriff  post  the  list  at  each  precinct,  and  upon 
election  day  furnishes  a  list  to  a  judge  of  election  at  each 
precinct.  He  also  sends  the  list  to  the  state  auditor,  who 
holds  the  treasurer  responsible  for  all  capitation  taxes 
reported. 

Elections. — Since  the  Civil  War,  elections  have  been  con- 
ducted by  three  judges  of  election  and  two  clerks  of  elec- 
•tion.  In  1873,  when  they  were  appointed  by  county  or  city 
court  judges,  the  General  Assembly  provided  that  "  when- 
ever it  is  practicable  to  do  so,"  one  of  the  three  judges 
should  be  of  the  most  numerous  minority  party.1  In  1884, 
when  the  appointment  was  transferred  from  the  court 
judges  to  the  electoral  boards,  a  fine  of  from  one  hundred 
to  five  hundred  dollars  was  made  the  penalty  for  not  giving 
minority  representation ;  but  such  neglect  did  not  make  the 
election  void.2  The  law  of  1904  provides  for  minority 
representation  "so  far  as  possible,"  and  imposes  a  fine  of 
from  one  hundred  to  five  hundred  dollars  for  a  non-ob- 
servance of  this  provision. 

Previous  to  the  constitution  of  1869,  voting  in  Virginia 
was  always  in  that  "  straight- for  ward  honorable  viva  voce 
manner  of  the  good  old  days."  The  introduction  of  the 
negro  into  politics  made  the  dependent  class  of  voters  in  the 
majority,  and  a  secret  ballot  was  the  natural  and  proper 
result.  Hence,  from  1869  to  1894  a  ballot  was  handed  to 
the  judges  of  election  through  a  window  and  deposited  in  a 
ballot-box  which  had  been  opened  and  locked  in  the  presence 
of  the  voters  at  the  beginning  of  the  election.  A  corrupt 
judge  of  election  had  an  excellent  opportunity  to  deposit 
several  ballots  from  the  same  voter. 

In  1894  the  Australian  Ballot  Law,3  which  was  urged  by 
M.  L.  Walton,  made  the  ballots  official.  Previous  to  this 
any  written  or  printed  ballot  could  be  used.  Under  this  new 

1  Acts,  1872-73,  c.  200. 

2  Acts,  1884,  c.  158. 
"Acts,  1893-94,  c.  746. 


84  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

law,  the  essentials  of  which  still  exist,  candidates  for  state 
and  national  offices  notify  the  secretary  of  the  Common- 
wealth of  their  candidacy;  those  for  local  offices  notify  the 
county  or  corporation  clerk  of  the  court.  These  names  are 
then  furnished  the  secretary  of  the  county  or  city  electoral 
board,  who  has  them  printed  upon  the  ballots.  While  they 
are  being  printed  he  must  be  present;  and  both  he  and  the 
printer  must  take  oath,  under  heavy  penalty,  that  the  ballots 
have  been  secretly  prepared.  The  electoral  board  then 
stamps  upon  the  back  of  each  ballot  an  official  seal  of  the 
board's  own  design;  wraps  into  separate  sealed  packages 
for  each  precinct  twice  as  many  tickets  as  there  are  regis- 
tered voters;  and  forwards  the  same  to  a  judge  of  election 
at  each  precinct,  who  must  open  the  package  in  the  presence 
of  the  other  judges  and  the  clerks  of  election. 

The  electoral  board  also  provides  a  sufficient  number  of 
booths  at  each  precinct,  forty  feet  away  from  outside  parties, 
to  allow  each  voter  two  and  a  half  minutes  in  the  booth  for 
the  secret  preparation  of  the  ticket  which  a  judge  of  election 
hands  him  when  he  enters.  This  law  was  construed  to 
prohibit  a  party  emblem  upon  the  ballot;  and  the  constitu- 
tion of  1902  specifically  prohibits  it.  The  voter  draws  a 
line  at  least  three  fourths  of  the  way  through  the  name  of 
the  candidate  he  opposes ;  and  by  improperly  marking  only 
a  part  of  the  ballot,  the  remainder  is  valid.  A  ballot  may 
not  be  carried  outside  the  polls.1  Until  1904  a  voter  who 
was  physically  or  educationally  unable  to  mark  his  ballot 
could  be  assisted  by  one  of  the  judges  of  election  selected 
by  the  other  judges  for  the  purpose.2  Every  one  who  has 
registered  since  January  I,  1904,  must  "prepare  and  deposit 

lThe  constitution  of  1902  grants  the  use  of  voting  machines,  pro- 
vided they  allow  the  elector  to  vote  secretly.  None  have  as  yet 
been  used. 

*The  original  measure  provided  for  a  special  constable  appointed 
by  the  electoral  board  to  give  this  assistance,  but  Mr.  Walton,  the 
author  of  the  bill,  did  not  want  a  special  constable.  The  provision 
for  this  officer  was  a  concession  to  machine  Democrats  who  wanted 
their  electoral  boards  to  name  a  constable  of  the  dominant  party. 
The  office  was  dropped  by  the  next  General  Assembly  because  of  the 
unnecessary  cost. 


The  Electorate  and  Elections.  85 

his  ballot  without  aid  unless  physically  unable";  but  one 
who  registered  previous  to  1904  may,  for  any  reason  what- 
ever, "be  aided  in  the  preparation  of  his  ballot  by  such 
officer  of  election  as  he  himself  may  designate." 

This  privilege  granted  the  old  electorate  is  being  much 
abused  in  some  sections.  For  instance,  in  the  1910  elec- 
tion, in  the  ninth  district  where  as  much  as  fifty  dollars  was 
paid  for  a  single  vote,  the  seller  would  be  required  to  call 
a  specified  judge  of  election  to  mark  his  ballot.  This  judge 
of  election  would  signal  to  the  purchaser  whether  "  the  goods 
had  been  delivered  "  before  the  payment  was  made.  This 
privileged  class  of  voters,  however,  is  gradually  becoming 
extinct. 

After  the  ballots  are  counted  in  the  presence  of  two 
electors  from  each  party,  they  are  strung,  sealed,  and,  with 
a  poll  book,  delivered  to  the  court  clerk  of  the  county  or 
city  to  be  kept  unbroken  for  twelve  months.  The  second 
day  after  the  election  the  vote  for  the  county  or  city  is 
canvassed  by  the  clerk  of  the  court  with  three  other  persons, 
who  have  acted  as  judges  of  election  and  have  also  been 
commissioned  by  the  circuit  or  corporation  judge  for  this 
additional  function.  When  state  or  national  offices  are  in- 
volved, the  results  are  forwarded  under  seal  to  the  secre- 
tary of  the  Commonwealth,  and  he,  with  the  governor, 
attorney-general,  and  auditor,  as  a  board  of  examiners, 
issue  certificates  of  election. 

This  Walton  Law,  a  modification  of  the  Australian  Ballot 
Law,  is  a  great  improvement  upon  the  old  system.  Before 
this  reform,  voters  would  be  made  drunk  the  night  before 
an  election,  locked  up  until  morning,  and  then  driven  to 
the  polls  and  voted.  However,  in  Scott  County  in  1900 
the  county  electoral  board  had  the  ticket  printed  in  such  a 
confused  manner  that  an  enormous  number  of  tickets  had 
to  be  thrown  out.1  The  electoral  board  was  Democratic; 
the  majority  of  votes  were  to  be  Republican.  More  recent 
legislation  has  made  such  ballots  illegal.  While  the  ballot 

1  Richmond  Times,  November  24,  1900. 


86  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

should  be  perfectly  simple  to  vote,  the  arrangement  of 
Tiames  of  candidates  should  be  made  to  rotate  in  some 
irregular  manner.  For  two  reasons  this  should  be  done; 
first,  it  would  prevent  the  use  of  a  stencil  by  illiterate  voters 
who,  by  hook  or  crook,  have  been  registered  since  1904 ;  and 
second,  it  would  remove  the  unfair  advantage  of  appearing 
first  on  the  ballot.  The  ballots  should  also  be  numbered, 
that  the  judges  can  be  certain  that  the  same  ballot  is  re- 
turned which  has  been  taken  into  the  booth.  By  losing  one 
vote  it  is  possible  for  the  first  voter  of  a  corrupt  clique  to 
deposit  a  fake  ballot,  and  bring  a  true  ballot  from  the  polls. 
By  thus  having  the  start  of  one  ballot,  the  ballots  of  any 
number  of  voters  can  be  prepared  on  the  outside.  These 
two  precautions,  namely,  the  rotation  of  the  names  of  candi- 
dates1 and  the  numbering  of  the  ballots,  could  be  taken  by 
any  electoral  board  without  any  general  legislation. 

Corrupt  Practices  Act. — "  No  candidates  .  .  .  shall  ex- 
pend, pay,  promise,  loan,  or  become  pecuniarily  liable  in  any 
way  for  any  money  or  other  valuable  thing  to  influence 
voters  on  his  behalf,  or  permit  the  same  to  be  so  used,  with 
his  knowledge  and  consent,  by  his  friends  or  adherents  in 
any  election,  primary  or  nominating  convention:  provided, 
however,  that  no  expenditure  made  by  any  candidate  or  his 
adherents  and  friends  for  the  purpose  of  printing  or  adver- 
tising in  some  newspapers,  or  in  securing  suitable  halls  for 
public  speaking  at  a  reasonable  price,  shall  be  deemed 
illegal."  Nor  shall  any  other  person  do  the  same  for  a 
candidate  under  a  penalty,  for  the  candidate  or  other  party, 
of  not  more  than  one  thousand  dollars  or  twelve  months  in 
jail.2  "No  witness  giving  evidence  in  any  prosecution  or 
other  proceeding  under  this  act  shall  be  ever  proceeded 
against  for  any  offense  against  this  act  or  against  the  other 
election  laws  committed  by  him  at  or  in  connection  with  the 
same  election,  primary  or  convention."3 

*An  unduly  long  ballot  tends  to  defeat  the  purpose  of  democracy. 
Subordinate  officers  should  be  appointed,  thereby  making  more  prom- 
inent the  election  of  a  few  officers  in  whom  responsibility  is  centered. 

2  Acts,  1902-3-4,  c.  98.  Vote-selling  or  vote-buying  is  a  crime 
penalized  by  permanent  disfranchisement. 

*Acts.  xox>8,  c.  315. 


The  Electorate  and  Elections.  87 

After  every  primary  or  election  a  candidate  must  file, 
under  oath,  with  the  officer  or  board  empowered  by  law  to 
issue  a  certificate  of  election,  a  detailed  statement  of  ex- 
penditures incurred  because  of  his  candidacy.  Failure  to 
file  such  a  statement  within  thirty  days  subjects  the  candi- 
date to  a  fine  of  not  more  than  five  thousand  dollars;  and 
no  commission  or  certificate  of  election  may  be  issued  until 
such  a  statement  is  filed. 

Primary  Elections. — Previous  to  1903  all  candidates  for 
state  offices  had  been  nominated  by  a  state  convention  of 
delegates  chosen  by  county  or  city  conventions,  county  offi- 
cers being  nominated  by  county  conventions;  but  in  either 
case  the  party  electors  first  met  at  a  primary  mass-meeting 
for  each  precinct.  It  was  in  these  precinct  meetings  that 
muscle  counted  for  more  than  merit,  and  a  doubly  strong 
voice  frequently  counted  for  two  votes.  These  meetings 
were  often  held  during  working  hours  for  the  convenience 
of  the  idle;  and  if  an  employer  of  a  large  number  of  men 
could  be  induced  to  give  half  holiday  on  full  pay,  the  pri- 
mary was  carried  triumphantly. 

The  Democratic  gubernatorial  convention  of  1901  made  it 
mandatory  upon  the  state  committee  to  provide  and  execute 
a  plan  of  primary  for  the  nomination  of  all  state  officers, 
including  United  States  senators.  In  the  first  primary,  in 
1903,  viva  voce  voting  was  employed.  This  was  especially 
objectionable  in  voting  for  local  officers,  since  one  often 
hesitated  to  express  himself  in  regard  to  neighbors ;  and  the 
vote  was  very  light.  Of  course,  the  greatest  objection  to 
viva  voce  voting  is  the  probability  of  intimidation  and  the 
facility  for  vote-buying,  as  the  purchaser  can  then  be  sure 
that  the  agreement  has  been  performed.  Since  this  first 
primary  the  Australian  system  of  secret  voting  has  been 
employed,  and  only  those  whites  qualified  to  vote  at  the  gen- 
eral election  are  allowed  to  participate  in  the  Democratic 
primary.  The  pledge  required  of  those  taking  part  in  the 
primary,  namely,  that  they  will  support  the  party  nominee, 
keeps  away  some,  though  in  most  precincts  the  oath  is  not 


88  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

administered,  but  implied.  This  pledge  is  most  inconsistent 
with  independent  voting,  Democracy,  and  good  government. 
If  a  corrupt  candidate,  whom  a  voter  cannot  conscientiously 
support,  enters  the  primary,  the  voter  is  in  honor  bound  not 
to  vote  in  that  primary;  and  he  thereby  assists  the  corrupt 
candidate  by  his  absence.  The  test  should  be  whether  he 
voted  for  the  party  candidate  at  the  last  regular  state  or 
national  election.  When  it  comes  to  fraudulent  participation 
in  a  primary,  those  guarding  the  primary  can  best  determine 
the  right  of  the  voter  to  participate  by  what  he  has  done  in 
the  past,  and  not  by  what  he  intends  to  do  in  the  future. 

In  the  primary  a  plurality  of  the  votes  actually  cast  secures 
the  nomination.  In  practice  the  number  of  candidates  enter- 
ing the  primary  for  any  one  office  has  usually  been  two, 
which  is  principally  due  to  the  fact  that  the  candidates  have 
to  bear  the  cost  of  the  primary  in  addition  to  the  heavy  cost 
of  the  campaign.  The  first  Democratic  state  primary  cost 
$9,800,  which  was  assessed  upon  the  candidates  as  follows: 
three  candidates  for  governor  were  assessed  $1,500  each, 
and  two  for  the  United  States  Senate  were  assessed  the 
same.  The  candidates  for  the  remaining  six  state  offices 
were  assessed  from  $100  to  $500  each.  In  1911  the  four 
candidates  for  the  two  seats  in  the  United  States  Senate 
were  assessed  $3,000  each.  Though  this  amount  is  incon- 
siderable as  compared  with  the  cost  of  a  well-organized  cam- 
paign, and  though  it  has  a  tendency  to  reduce  the  number  of 
candidates,  it  seems  that  the  primary  should  become  a  part 
of  the  state  election  machinery,  and  that  the  expenses  of  it 
should  be  borne  by  either  the  county  or  the  State.  The 
primary  has  been  given  statutory  recognition,1  but  prac- 
tically a  free  hand  has  been  left  to  the  political  party. 

1  The  constitution  of  1902  permits  the  General  Assembly  to  provide 
for  an  official  primary;  but  this  has  not  been  done.  However,  Acts, 
1902-3-4,  c.  587,  provides  that,  "  All  laws  intended  to  secure  the  regu- 
larity and  purity  of  general  and  local  elections,  and  to  prevent  and 
punish  any  corrupt  practices  in  connection  therewith,  and  the  penal- 
ties and  punishments  now  or  hereafter  prescribed  by  law  for  such 
offenses,  shall,  so  far  as  they  may  be  applicable,  apply  to  all  primary 
elections,  whether  the  same  be  held  under  any  statute  law  of  this 
State  or  under  a  plan  provided  by  some  political  party." 


The  Electorate  and  Elections.  89 

The  Republican  party  continues  to  observe  the  convention 
plan.  The  Democratic  state  committee,  in  providing  for  a 
state  primary,  has  not  provided  for  obligatory  county  pri- 
maries ;  but  most  of  the  Democratic  county  committees  have 
provided  for  county  primaries  similar  to  the  State  primary. 
Discussion  of  the  Present  System. — The  wholesale  dis- 
franchisement  provided  for  by  the  constitution  of  1902  was 
necessary.1  The  governor  of  the  State  in  his  message  of 
1898  referred  to  instances  where  one  third  or  one  half  of 
the  Australian  ballots  were  thrown  out  because  of  the  illit- 
erate electorate,  and  this  was  true  even  when  all  who  were 
not  too  proud  could  seek  the  assistance  of  a  judge  of  elec- 
tion. As  a  remedy  the  governor  suggested  an  emblem  bal- 
lot ;  but  the  General  Assembly  wisely  ignored  his  suggestion. 
Is  it  surprising  that  a  reform  candidate  cannot  be  elected  in 
cities  where  the  balance  of  power  is  in  the  hands  of  electors 
whose  utmost  discretion  is  shown  in  the  choice  between  an 
elephant  and  a  jackass?  Or,  illustrated  in  another  way,  is 
it  not  a  reductio  ad  absurdum  when  voters  who  can  neither 
read  nor  write  have  the  balance  of  power  to  decide  who  is 
the  most  capable  educator  for  the  state  superintendent  of 
public  instruction  ? 

Next,  as  to  the  methods  of  disfranchisement.  Under 
the  temporary  registration  of  1902-1903  the  unconditional 
admission  of  war  veterans  and  their  sons,  the  so-called 
"grandfather  clause,"  was  a  means  of  marching  the  army 
of  whites  through  the  fortification  of  the  fourteenth  amend- 
ment to  the  Federal  Constitution.  However,  it  was  not 
without  justification.  One  who  has  spent  four  of  the  best 

1  By  some  the  convention  was  criticized  for  not  submitting  the 
constitution  to  the  people.  Had  it  submitted  it  according  to  pre- 
cedents it  would  have  submitted  it  to  the  new  electorate;  and  this 
electorate  would  have  ratified  it  overwhelmingly.  Three  times  in 
the  history  of  the  State,  the  suffrage  was  extended  by  constitutional 
conventions,  and  each  time  it  was  ratified  by  the  votes  of  the  new 
enlarged  electorate.  The  Democratic  party,  in  convention,  had 
promised  to  submit  the  new  constitution,  hence  it  committed  a  breach 
of  party  faith ;  but  the  constitutional  convention  was  not  bound  by 
the  pledge  of  any  party  convention,  and  could  not  have  been  legally 
bound  even  by  an  act  of  the  General  Assembly. 


90  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

years  of  his  life  in  the  army  of  a  State  unable  to  pension 
him  deserves  tolerance,  and  many  sons  are  now  deficient  in 
education  or  property  because  their  fathers  sacrificed  their 
lives  to  the  3tate  and  the  boys  had  to  support  the  war- 
stricken  family. 

The  clause  requiring  residence  for  two  years  is  good.  The 
majority  of  transient  voters  are  of  that  worthless  class 
which  a  "  ward-heeler  "  can  use  for  his  purpose ;  and  those 
who  will  improve  the  electorate  need  to  live  in  a  community 
before  learning  the  comparative  merits  of  candidates.  The 
payment  of  a  dollar  and  a  half  annual  capitation  tax  for 
the  three  years  preceding  the  election,  as  a  prerequisite  to 
voting  is  an  excellent  provision  j1  and  especially  good  is  the 
requirement  that  it  be  paid  six  months  in  advance  of  the 
regular  election.  For  revenue  there  is  little  if  any  justice 
in  such  a  tax ;  but  the  amount  is  nominal  for  those  who  have 
sufficient  intelligence  and  frugality  to  deserve  a  ballot. 
These  capitation  taxes  are  not  paid  by  politicians  to  as  great 
an  extent  as  would  be  expected,  and  for  three  reasons ;  first, 
such  payment  is  illegal;  second,  nominations  for  office  are 
not  usually  made  six  months  before  election;  and  third,  a 
voter  who  will  allow  his  tax  to  be  paid  in  consideration  of 
his  vote  is  not  infrequently  three  years  in  arrears,  and  the 
amount  to  be  paid  is  thus  more  considerable. 

The  weakness  of  the  plan  is  that  most  elections  in  a  one- 
party  state  are  determined  at  the  primary.  In  fact,  in  a 
number  of  counties  in  which  an  actual  election  contest  with 
an  opposing  party  will  decide,  the  primary  is  held  more 
than  six  months  in  advance  of  the  election,  so  that  the  capi- 
tation tax  requirement  may  be  evaded.  This  scheme  has 
only  recently  been  used ;  and  it  not  only  enables  the  political 
parties  to  qualify  the  class  which  the  Constitutional  Conven- 
tion endeavored  to  eliminate,  but  it  practically  forces  a  party 
organization  to  pay  the  poll-taxes  of  a  large  indifferent  class 
who  would  not  actually  sell  their  votes.  This  encumbers 

*In  the  constitutional  convention  this  section  was  carried  by 
57  to  1 6. 


The  Electorate  and  Elections.  91 

candidates  with  a  heavy  expense,  and  works  to  the  advan- 
tage of  a  machine  candidate  or  one  who  is  already  in  office, 
as  a  candidate  without  means  will  hesitate  to  incur  the  heavy 
cost.  This  new  and  dangerous  scheme  should  be  checked 
at  once  by  legalizing  the  primary  and  appointing  dates  for 
all  primaries  less  than  six  months  before  the  election.  The 
saloon  element  has  been  active  in  paying  the  capitation  taxes 
for  its  retainers  previous  to  liquor  local  option  elections. 
Some  people  hold  the  view  that  this  poll-tax  prerequisite 
injures  the  electorate  instead  of  improving  it.  They  show 
how  professional  politicians,  especially  in  cities,  look  after 
the  taxes  of  those  who  can  be  influenced,  while  many  honest 
voters  through  carelessness  allow  the  time  for  paying  the 
poll-taxes  to  lapse.  To  some  extent  this  is  true.  The  con- 
dition should  be  met  by  requiring  treasurers  to  notify,  by  a 
postal  card,  those  who  have  not  paid  the  poll-tax  one  week 
prior  to  the  final  date  upon  which  the  payment  will  qualify 
for  voting. 

The  exacting  of  an  educational  test  for  registration  is 
legislation  in  the  right  direction;  but  the  provision  as 
drafted  was  not  favored  by  a  strong  minority  of  the  Con- 
stitutional Convention  because  it  placed  too  much  discretion 
in  the  hands  of  the  registrars.  Delegates  from  the  "  black 
belt "  claimed  that  a  straight  automatic  reading  and  writing 
test  would  soon  exclude  no  negroes,  and  that  the  mere 
acquisition  of  a  knowledge  to  read  and  write  would  not 
make  the  negroes  proper  voters.  This  is  true,  but  the  re- 
quirements should  be  higher,  and  should  be  fairly  admin- 
istered to  all. 

Since  the  State  has  committed  itself  to  an  educational 
test,  the  questions  should  be  uniform  and  the  grading  of  the 
answers  uniform.  A  few  practical  questions  such  as  are 
now  considered  proper  to  ask  orally  should  be  prepared  semi- 
annually  for  the  whole  State  by  some  person  or  persons 
agreed  upon  by  the  chairmen  of  the  two  leading  political 
parties.  These  questions,  sealed,  should  be  sent  to  a  regis- 
trar for  each  precinct,  and  all  over  the  State,  on  the  same 


92  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

day  they  should  be  answered  in  writing  by  all  persons  who 
register  conditionally.  The  examinations  could  be  given  on 
Saturdays  in  schoolhouses,  and  each  party  could  be  permitted 
to  have  watchers.  In  the  presence  of  these  watchers  the 
answers  could  be  sealed  and  returned  to  the  State  examiner 
agreed  upon  by  the  two  party  chairmen.  This  examiner, 
with  assistants,  could  grade  the  papers  and  issue  certificates 
on  printed  postal  cards.  These  certificates  could  be  mailed 
to  the  persons  entitled  thereto,  and  a  list  of  such  might  be 
sent  to  the  county  or  city  clerk  of  the  court  for  permanent 
filing  and  public  inspection.  The  registrar  from  this  list 
might  place  upon  his  permanent  list  all  who  have  been  suc- 
cessful. Since  this  test  qualifies  one  for  life,  the  registra- 
tions at  any  one  time  would  not  be  numerous  or  the  cost  an 
item  worth  considering.  The  fact  of  having  an  actual,  fair 
test  as  a  prerequisite  to  voting  would  make  the  study  of  the 
government  of  Virginia  a  study  of  vital  interest  to  every 
seventh  grade  grammar  school  boy  who  is  now  required  to 
take  a  course  in  civil  government;  and  a  deserving  young 
man  who  has  been  unable  to  reach  the  seventh  grade  could 
easily  learn  the  elements  of  government  during  evening 
hours. 

As  an  alternative  to  the  educational  test  there  might  be 
added  a  property  test,  that  is,  to  allow  to  vote  those  who 
have  paid  a  specified  state  property  tax  for  three  years  past. 
Under  the  general  registration  of  1902-1903  a  person  could 
register  who  owned  property  upon  which,  for  the  year  next 
preceding  that  in  which  he  offered  to  register,  state  taxes 
aggregating  at  least  one  dollar  had  been  paid.1  In  Washing- 
ton District,  Norfolk  County,  nearly  one  hundred  negro 
men  had  their  assessments  raised  sufficiently  to  register 
under  this  provision.2  The  machine  was  in  the  hands  of 
the  Democrats,  but  the  minority  faction  of  Democrats  was 
accused  of  being  in  sympathy  with  the  Republicans ;  and  the 

1  The  state  rate  was  40  cents  on  the  hundred,  hence  the  possession 
of  property  valued  at  $250  was  necessary. 

2  Article  by  W.  S.  Copeland,  Richmond  Times  Dispatch,  January 
i,  1904. 


The  Electorate  and  Elections.  93 

commissioner  of  revenue  who  assessed  the  negroes  belonged 
to  this  faction. 

In  the  spring  of  1905  the  editor  of  the  Lynchburg  News 
collected  registration  data  which  showed  that  of  the  147,000 
negroes  qualified  to  vote  under  the  old  regime  only  21,000 
had  registered  under  the  new.  Of  the  301,000  whites  under 
the  old  regime,  276,000  had  registered.1  During  the  regis- 
tration of  1902—1903  one  registrar  expressed  the  sentiment 
of  many  others  when  he  said  that  the  only  reason  why  all 
the  whites  of  his  precinct  were  not  registered  was  the  fact 
that  they  were  too  "  bull-headed  "  to  try.  In  many  other 
cases  negroes  were  asked  questions  concerning  the  constitu- 
tion which  the  registrar  himself  could  not  have  answered. 
But  now,  under  the  pressure  of  local  option  elections,  many 
of  the  worst  element  of  negroes  and  whites  are  being 
admitted.  At  present,  owing  to  an  overlooked  defect  in  the 
statute  law,  there  is  no  way  of  getting  rid  of  the  names 
improperly  put  upon  the  registration  books  from  fifteen  days 
before  the  regular  registration  day  in  May  until  the  next 
regular  registration  day  be  fore  the  November  election.  That 
is,  only  twice  a  year,  fifteen  days  before  each  registration 
day,  can  improper  registration  be  tested.  Hence,  for  special 
and  local  option  elections,  a  registrar  can  admit  practically 
whom  he  pleases. 

The  requirement  that  an  applicant  for  registration  regis- 
ter, "  in  his  own  handwriting,  without  aid,  suggestion,  or 
memorandum,"  has  never  been  uniformly  administered.  In 
some  instances  a  printed  form  is  used.  Others  have  not 
allowed  even  this  assistance ;  and  in  Lynchburg,  in  1910,  all 
of  the  registrars  except  one  registered  applicants  after 
an  oral  examination,  as  they  had  done  since  the  new  registra- 
tion law  went  into  effect.  The  one  registrar  used  type- 
written forms  containing  the  questions  to  be  answered.  In 
Anderson  v.  Craddock,  decided  by  the  corporation  court  of 
Lynchburg  on  March  6,  1911,  Judge  Christian  held  that  the 
oral  examination  was  certainly  improper,  and  that  it  was  a 

1  Richmond  Times  Dispatch,  April  i,  1905. 


94  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

question  whether  the  registrar  who  used  typewritten  forms 
had  not  given  illegal  assistance.  He  urged,  however,  that 
the  Constitutional  Convention  of  1902  had  intended  to  dis- 
franchise the  negro  by  giving  the  registrars  extreme  discre- 
tion, and  that  the  registrars  had  conformed  with  the  intent 
though  not  with  the  letter  of  the  law.1  The  court  upheld 
the  election  in  the  following  words : 

"  I  am  satisfied  that  the  Court  has  not  the  jurisdiction  to 
declare  void  the  election  of  December  9,  1910,  simply  be- 
cause the  registrars  were  grossly  negligent  in  the  perform- 
ance of  their  duties.  It  would  be  making  the  innocent  and 
qualified  voters,  so  far  as  the  record  shows,  suffer  the  dere- 
lictions of  incompetent  registrars,  which  is  contrary  to  my 
sense  of  justice.  The  remedy  for  this  negligence  is  easy  for 
the  Legislature,  and  in  its  absence  should  not  be  usurped 
by  the  courts  at  the  cost  of  the  citizen." 

In  the  decision  of  the  same  year  rendered  by  Judge  Mc- 
Lemore  of  the  corporation  court  of  Suffolk  it  was  held  that 
a  registrar  may  not  register  one  who  has  not  mad.e  applica- 
tion; that  all  constitutional  requirements  were  mandatory, 
and  unless  they  were  obeyed,  the  voter  whose  name  was 
placed  upon  the  books  by  the  registrar  acquired  no  privilege 
as  a  result.  The  act  of  the  registrar  was  void. 

In  liquor  local  option  contested  elections  an  appeal  may 
not  be  taken  to  the  court  of  appeals.  But  a  registrar  will 
certainly  be  on  the  safe-  side  if  he  furnishes  the  applicant  a 
copy  of  the  law  and  allows  the  applicant  to  make  application 
to  register  in  his  own  handwriting;  and  also  allows  the 
applicant  to  write  all  questions  asked  him,  as  well  as  the 
answers  thereto.  A  registrar  should  be  allowed  to  use 
typewritten  questions,  but  whether  he  may  the  courts  have- 
not  decided. 

1  See  Debates  of  the  Constitutional  Convention  of  1902,  pp.  3076-7. 
When  the  state-wide  issue  occurs,  which  is  practically  certain  to 
happen  at  no  distant  date,  the  only  way  to  avoid  the  flooding  of  the- 
electorate  with  undesirable  negroes  is  to  permit  to  vote  only  those 
electors  who  were  qualified  voters  at  a  set  time  previous  to  the  time 
when  the  enabling  act  is  passed. 


CHAPTER   III. 

CHARITIES  AND  CORRECTIONS. 
I.    STATE  HOSPITALS  FOR  THE  INSANE. 

Growth. — Two  years  before  the  Revolutionary  War  the 
first  Virginia  asylum  for  the  reception  of  insane  persons 
was  formally  opened  at  Williamsburg.1  In  1828  the  second 
asylum,  known  as  the  Western  Lunatic  Asylum,  was  opened 
at  Staunton  with  accommodations  for  16  men  and  16  women. 
The  asylum  at  Williamsburg  thereupon  became  known  as 
the  Eastern  Asylum.  At  the  close  of  the  Civil  War  the 
Freedman's  Bureau  established  an  asylum  for  sick  and 
indigent  freedmen  near  Richmond.  Upon  the  discontinu- 
ance of  this  bureau,  the  inmates  of  this  asylum  other  than 
the  insane  were  sent  to  county  almshouses,  the  insane  neces- 
sarily being  retained.  To  meet  this  emergency  the  General 
Assembly  of  1870  established  in  the  same  temporary  build- 
ings an  institution  for  the  colored,  known  as  the  Central 
Lunatic  Asylum.2  Fifteen  years  ago  the  colored  insane  were 
moved  to  their  new  permanent  Central  Lunatic  Asylum  near 
Petersburg.  The  Southwestern  Asylum  was  opened  at 
Marion  in  the  year  1887  because  the  other  asylums  were 
overcrowded.  In  1894  the  name  was  changed  from  "  insane 
asylums  "  to  "  hospitals  for  the  insane." 

The  Epileptic  Colony,  near  Lynchburg,  was  opened  in 
1911  for  several  hundred  patients  from  the  other  asylums, 
which  were  again  crowded.  A  tract  of  land  was  given  to  the 
Western  Hospital  by  Mr.  Murkland  in  appreciation  of  kind 
treatment  tendered  his  son  at  that  hospital.  The  special 

aThis  is  said  to  be  the  first  in  America. 

*  In  the  days  of  slavery  masters  took  charge  of  the  few  cases  of 
insanity  among  their  slaves.  They  were  occasionally  sent  to  the 
Eastern  Asylum  as  pay  patients. 

95 


96  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

board  of  the  Western  Hospital  was  permitted  to  sell  this 
tract  and  purchase  a  more  suitable  one  in  the  same  county.1 
In  I9io2  the  colony  was  made  independent  of  the  Western 
Hospital,  and  was  placed  upon  the  same  basis  as  the  other 
hospitals.  One  argument  advanced  in  favor  of  the  colony 
was  that  it  could  be  made  nearly  self-sustaining.  The  ful- 
fillment of  this  prediction  remains  to  be  seen.  The  same 
was  predicted  in  regard  to  the  state  farm  for  convicts. 

Since  ante-bellum  days  a  judge  had  had  authority  to  place 
an  insane  person  permanently  in  the  keeping  of  a  fit  care- 
taker, who  received  the  same  compensation  that  the  jailer 
would  have  received;  but  this  privilege  was  abused,  and  it 
has  recently  been  practically  discontinued.  The  jailer's  pay 
has  been  not  more  than  50  cents  a  day,  at  the  discretion  of 
the  judge,  for  food  and  attention.  The  annual  report  of  the 
Central  Asylum  for  1879  states  that  the  110  colored  insane 
then  in  jails  cost  the  State  $i  a  day,  including  clothing  and 
medical  attention,  while  at  the  asylum  the  cost  was  only 
55  cents  a  day  for  everything,  including  transportation. 
Until  quite  recently  there  has  been  scarcely  a  year  since  the 
Civil  War  when  all  insane  could  be  provided  for  in  the 
asylums.  Conditions  gradually  grew  worse  from  the  date 
of  the  war  until  1882,  when  the  State  appropriated  $44,060 
for  the  care  of  insane  in  jails,  which  meant  an  average  of 
one  in  every  jail  in  the  State  throughout  the  year.  Since 
1882  conditions  have  slowly  improved.3  Since  the  creation 
of  a  commissioner  of  hospitals  for  the  insane  no  patients 
have  been  kept  in  jails  for  any  length  of  time,  and  in  1910 
the  cost  of  those  temporarily  lodged  in  jails  or  with  indi- 
viduals was  only  $2,751. 

1  Acts,  1908,  c.  195. 

a  Acts,  1910,0.31. 

*The  superintendents  of  the  Western  Asylum  state  in  their  annual 
reports  that  in  1873  there  were  300  white  insane  outside  of  asylums ; 
in  1874,  291  insane  in  seventy-nine  counties;  in  1876,  155  applications 
rejected  at  the  Western  Asylum;  in  1890,  from  200  to  300  white 
insane  unprovided  for.  In  1886  the  amusement  hall  at  the  Eastern 
Asylum  was  converted  into  female  dormitories.  The  superintendent 
of  the  Southwestern  Asylum  stated  in  1894  that  over  100  white 
insane  were  not  provided  for;  and  in  1899  he  stated  that  for  want 
of  accommodations  some  died  in  jails. 


Charities  and  Corrections.  97 

The  number  of  hospital  inmates  has  increased  constantly 
and  very  rapidly.  In  1860  when  the  population  of  the  State 
(including  West  Virginia)  was  1,596,318,  there  were  672 
in  the  asylums  who  cost  the  State  $90,000  for  "  support  and 
maintenance."  In  1910  when  the  population  was  2,061,612, 
there  were  3,996*  in  the  asylums  who  cost  the  State  for 
"  support  and  maintenance  "  $479,967.2 

Control. — The  control  of  the  asylums  has  always  been 
lodged  in  separate  boards  of  directors  for  each  asylum. 
Until  1884  these  boards  were  appointed  by  the  governor  for 
three-year  terms.  At  that  time  the  Readjuster  party  declared 
the  offices  of  directors  vacant  and  provided  that  the  board 
of  public  works  should  appoint.3  Two  years  later  the  Demo- 
crats provided  for  the  appointment,  by  the  governor,  of 
three  each  year  for  a  term  of  three  years.  This  continued 
until  the  Constitutional  Convention  in  1902.  Until  1902  a 
superintendent  for  each  asylum  had  been  elected  by  the 
respective  boards  of  directors  for  two  year  terms,  though 
in  consideration  of  good  behavior  he  was  reelected  except 
when  the  Readjusters  made  a  "clean  sweep."  From  1900 
until  1902  the  presidents  of  the  boards  of  directors  and  the 
superintendents  of  the  asylums  met  annually  to  systematize 
the  administration. 

The  constitution  of  1902  completely  changed  the  organi- 
zation. It  provides  for  a  board  of  directors  for  each  "  hos- 
pital for  the  insane,"  to  be  appointed  for  six  years  by  the 
governor,  one  director  being  appointed  every  two  years. 
There  is  also  a  general  board  for  the  control  and  manage- 
ment of  all  the  state  hospitals  for  the  insane,  which  is  com- 
posed of  the  directors  of  the  respective  special  boards.  The 
general  board  is  subject  to  such  regulations  as  the  General 

Eastern,  790;  Central  (colored),  1448;  Western,  1079;  South- 
western, 670. 

2  The  figures  for  1860  do  not  include  the  cost  of  conveyance,  while 
those  for  1910  do.  This,  however,  is  not  a  considerable  item. 
Neither  include  cost  of  buildings.  In  1860  $21,000  additional  was 
paid  by  patients :  $5000  at  the  Eastern,  $16.000  at  the  Western  (Docu- 
ments, 1859-60,  Doc.  No.  19).  In  1910  nothing  was  thus  paid. 

'Acts,  1883-84,  c.  117,  118. 


98  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia, 

Assembly  prescribes,  but  has  full  power  and  control  over 
the  special  boards  of  directors  and  over  all  of  the  officers 
and  employees  of  the  several  hospitals.  The  general  board 
appoints  a  superintendent  for  each  hospital  for  a  term  of 
four  years,  though  the  appointment  is  practically  during 
good  behavior.  The  special  boards  of  three  appoint  all 
other  resident  officers  for  four  years,  subject  to  the  approval 
of  the  general  board.  The  superintendent  appoints  all  other 
employees,  and  may  dismiss  the  same  with  the  approval  of 
the  special  board.1 

A  commissioner  of  state  hospitals  is  appointed  by  the 
governor  for  a  term  of  four  years.  He  is  ex-officio  chair- 
man of  the  general  board  which  meets  quarterly  at  the  hos- 
pitals, once  a  year  at  each  hospital,  and  of  the  special  boards 
which  meet  monthly.  He  is  responsible  for  the  proper  dis- 
bursement of  all  money,  and  maintains  a  uniform  system  of 
keeping  records  and  accounts  of  money  received  and  dis- 
bursed ;  and  at  least  once  in  six  months  he  must  examine  the 
validity  of  bonds  given  by  banks  where  hospital  appropria- 
tions are  deposited.  He  visits  the  hospitals  monthly  or  bi- 
monthly, usually  the  former,  to  audit  accounts  and  to  inspect. 
He  notifies  sheriffs  if  certain  hospitals  are  full.  The  salary 
is  $2,000  plus  $500  for  traveling  expenses.  In  1906  a  bill 
was  introduced  in  the  Senate  providing  that  the  commis- 
sioner be  an  alienist  who  should  receive  a  sufficient  salary 
to  enable  him  to  devote  his  whole  time  to  the  work.  As  the 
matter  stands,  the  commissioner  is  not  supposed  to  be  an 
alienist ;  and  the  present  incumbent  is  a  lawyer. 

Commitment. — From  1874  until  1900  the  insane  were  com- 
mitted by  three  justices  of  the  peace.  This  was  essentially 
the  method  of  the  old  English  vagrant  act  of  colonial  days. 
In  1884  a  legislative  committee  reported2  that  the  privilege 
of  committing  the  colored  to  the  Central  Asylum  that  they 
might  receive  state  support  was  much  abused  by  certain 
localities.  The  superintendent  of  the  asylum  testified  that 

1  Constitution  of  1902,  Art.  XI,  sec.  149-151. 

2  Senate  Journal,  1883-^84,  Doc.  No.  33. 


Chanties  and  Corrections.  99 

fifty  to  seventy-five  imbeciles  or  idiots,  who  could  properly 
be  cared  for  at  an  almshouse  at  half  cost,  were  in  the  asylum,, 
though  they  could  not  possibly  be  benefited.  From  1870  to 
1886  any  three  directors  of  an  asylum  could  reject  a  patient 
whom  they  considered  an  idiot  or  merely  a  pauper ;  but  few 
were  rejected.  Again,  in  1896,  a  joint  committee  said:1 
"  We  would  call  attention  to  the  fact  that  in  other  states 
separate  hospitals  are  provided  for  idiots  and  weak-minded 
patients.  Some  of  these  classes  are  in  our  hospitals,  but 
the  promptings  of  humanity  compels  us  to  permit  them  to 
remain  instead  of  returning  them  to  their  homes  to  be  con- 
fined in  the  jails  and  poorhouses  of  their  respective  counties." 

Since  I9OO2  a  suspect  has  been  brought  before  one  justice 
of  the  peace  or  judge.  The  official  summons  two  physi- 
cians, in  no  way  interested,  who  act  upon  oath.  If  the  two 
disagree,  a  third  may  be  called  in.  Since  1886  the  asylums 
have  had  no  authority  to  reject  any  person  committed  by  the 
justices,  or  more  recently  by  the  single  justice.  To  reject 
persons  committed  would  result  in  endless  dissatisfaction. 
That  many  are  sent  to  the  hospitals  for  the  insane  who 
should  be  cared  for  in  almshouses3  no  one  doubts.  For 
instance,  who  believes  that  in  1910  80  per  cent,  more  per- 
sons, according  to  population,  became  insane  in  the  counties* 
in  which  the  four  hospitals  are  situated  than  in  the  state 
at  large  ?  Yet  80  per  cent,  more  were  committed  from  these 
counties.  This  excess  of  admissions  from  these  counties 
has  always  existed.  The  only  way  to  check  it  is  to  have  the 
counties  and  cities  pay  for  the  support  of  those  committed 
from  them. 

Until  1908  a  patient  was  committed  at  his  own  expense 
if  he  possessed  a  certain  amount  of  property.  The  adminis- 
tration of  this  provision  has  always  resulted  in  much  injus- 

1  House  Journal,  1895-96,  Doc.  No.  5. 

'Acts,  1899-00,  c.  933. 

8  In  most  of  the  counties  the  almshouse  is  a  miserable  asylum. 
The  small  counties  should  combine  so  that  enough  able-bodied  per- 
sons could  be  had  to  work  a  large  farm  to  feed  the  imbeciles,  who 
could  be  more  cheaply  and  comfortably  cared  for  if  so  grouped. 

4  Towns  or  cities  in  such  counties  are  included. 


ioo  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

tice.  In  1891  out  of  600  patients  at  the  Western  Asylum 
only  35  were  pay  patients ;  and  at  the  Central  Asylum  there 
has  never  been  a  pay  patient.  Collections  were  badly  made. 
In  1906  an  agent  was  appointed  to  collect  back  claims ;  and 
in  1908  the  General  Assembly  provided  that  in  the  future 
mo  one  should  be  required  to  pay. 

Management. — In  1910  the  cost  per  capita  for  main- 
tenance was  $157.59  at  the  Eastern  Hospital;  $126.93  at  the 
Southwestern;  $121.62  at  the  Western;  and  $105.69  at  the 
Central.  These  figures  are  a  good  index  to  the  management 
of  the  hospitals  during  the  past  forty  years.  At  the  Eastern 
Hospital  in  the  early  eighties  a  politician  was  made  super- 
intendent. He  turned  out  all  the  male  staff  and  attendants 
except  members  of  the  Readjuster  party,  and  used  the  farm 
vehicles  for  political  purposes.1  In  1884  one  meeting  was 
actually  broken  up  by  several  drunken  members  of  the 
board.2  The  following  year  the  main  building  burned  be- 
cause there  was  no  night  attendant..  About  1905  a  gen- 
eral disturbance  arose  between  the  board  and  the  super- 
intendent because  the  latter  had  a  barrel  of  whiskey  moved 
from  the  steward's  room  to  that  of  the  pharmacist.  An 
investigation  was  made ;  and  though  the  superintendent  was 
justified  in  having  the  whiskey  moved  to  a  place  of  safer 
keeping,  it  developed,  according  to  a  special  accountant's 
report  in  1906,  that  there  was  an  annual  bill  for  one  or  two 
thousand  cigars  at  $85  per  thousand ;  that  the  beef  contract 
had  not  been  granted  to  the  lowest  bidder ;  that  there  were 
no  night  attendants;  and  that  no  cash  discounts  were  se- 
cured, which  had  caused  the  State  to  lose  $10,000  since  1899. 
The  special  accountant  did  not  find  any  evidence  of  graft, 
but  found  the  steward,  the  superintendent,  the  special  board, 
and  the  commissioner  of  state  hospitals  at  fault  as  far  as 
ordinary  efficiency  was  concerned. 

This  inefficiency  for  a  long  period  naturally  did  not  keep 
the  asylum  abreast  with  the  times,  and  the  present  super- 

1  Senate  Journal,  1883-84,  Doc.  No.  32. 
-  Senate  Journal,  1885-86,  Doc.  No.  43. 


Charities  and  Corrections.  101 

intendent  took  charge  of  the  most  poorly  equipped  plant  in 
the  State.  The  asylum  is  three  quarters  of  a  mile  from  the 
railroad,  which  means  an  annual  cost  of  $1,000  for  hauling 
coal.  The  inmates  seemed  to  think  farm-work  degrading, 
for  which  reason  the  farm  was  not  increased  in  size  or 
made  valuable  either  for  diversion  or  financial  profit.  There 
is  no  cold  storage  and  ice  plant.  Flour  and  beef  are  higher 
than  at  the  Western  or  the  Southwestern  Hospitals,  as  are 
the  larger  fruits. 

The  Western  Hospital  is  well  located  on  a  fertile  farm  at 
the  edge  of  a  prosperous  town,  and  immediately  .at  the 
junction  of  two  railroads.  Coal  does  not  have  to  be  hauled. 
There  is  a  cold  storage  and  ice  plant  and  a  large  reservoir 
dug  from  the  top  of  a  hill  just  back  of  the  plant  by  the  in- 
mates. Flour  can  be  purchased  from  a  mill  in  sight  of  the 
hospital;  and  the  best  grade  of  cattle  are  purchased  and 
killed  in  the  institution's  own  abattoir.  Each  year  about 
4,000  pounds  of  blood  from  this  abattoir  fatten  a  number 
of  hogs.  In  1910  there  were  gathered  from  the  farm  400 
bushels  of  peaches,  11,000  pounds  of  grapes,  and  several 
hundred  barrels  of  apples;  and  6,600  gallons  of  fruit  were 
put  up  for  winter.  In  fact  the  farm  produced  a  profit  of 
$16,586.  This  hospital  seems  always  to  have  been  very 
well  managed. 

The  Central  Hospital  (colored)  is  deserving  of  especial 
mention.  When  the  original  building  was  erected,  some  lax 
administration  on  the  part  of  the  board  was  discovered  by 
an  investigation  committee ;  but  during  recent  years  this  has 
been  the  best  administered  hospital  in  the  State.  The  organi- 
zation is  almost  perfect,  every  detail  being  daily  brought  to 
the  attention  of  the  superintendent.  For  1910  the  farm 
showed  a  profit  of  $11,175.  When  additional  farming  land 
was  needed,  the  superintendent  saw  an  opportunity  to  buy 
an  adjoining  farm  at  a  bargain.  He  bought  it,  and  stated 
to  the  next  General  Assembly  that  he  had  made  what  he 
considered  a  good  bargain.  If  they  did  not  want  the  farm, 
he  would  keep  it.  The  General  Assembly  made  an  appro- 


IO2  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

priation  for  it.  If  he  had  simply  asked  for  an  appropriation 
for  a  farm,  it  is  doubtful  whether  he  would  have  received 
it  for  years,  and  when  he  did,  a  "  public  price  "  would  have 
been  placed  on  all  adjoining  land.  That  the  per  capita  cost 
is  least  at  this  hospital  is  partly  due  to  the  fact  that  the 
colored  attendants  cost  less,  and  that  colored  patients  are 
accustomed  to  less  attention  than  white  patients.  But  the 
accommodations  are  little,  if  at  all,  inferior  to  those  for  the 
whites.  For  this  saving  to  the  State  the  superintendent  is 
mainly  responsible. 

Treatment. — As  far  as  freedom  from  physical  restraint, 
clean  and  fairly  comfortable  quarters,  and  sufficient  food  are 
concerned,  the  writer  could  observe  nothing  deserving  unfav- 
orable criticism  in  the  three  hospitals  which  he  visited.  The 
superintendents  of  the  hospitals  are  also  physicians  for  the 
hospitals,  and  seem  to  be  competent  medical  men.  The 
superintendent  of  the  Central  Hospital,  Dr.  William  Francis 
Drewry,  especially,  keeps  in  the  closest  touch  with  the  latest 
treatment,  and  has  himself  contributed  much,  from  his  own 
observations  and  experiments,  to  the  literature  on  the  treat- 
ment of  insanity.  The  Central  Hospital  was  the  first  hos- 
pital for  the  insane  in  the  South  to  segregate  a  tuberculosis 
colony.  Dr.  Drewry  also  colonized  the  epileptics  some  time 
before  the  white  epileptics  were  moved  to  the  epileptic 
colony.  All  of  the  hospitals  are  now  endeavoring  to  colon- 
ize the  different  forms  of  insanity,  but  are  limited  because 
of  the  additional  expense  involved  in  the  movement.  In 
1911  all  of  the  white  criminal  insane  were  transferred  Jo  the 
Southwestern  Hospital,  where  a  new  building  was  erected 
for  them.1 

Five  physicians  in  chief  cannot  attend  3,996  patients  in 
addition  to  superintending  the  institution;  and  the  assistant 
physicians  are  practically  always  inexperienced  men  because 
the  salaries  are  not  sufficient  to  hold  the  incumbents  for  long 
periods.  In  fact  the  so-called  "  hospitals  for  the  insane  "  are 
hardly  more  than  asylums  for  safe  keeping.  If  for  no  other 

1Even  those  awaiting  trial  may  be  sent  here. 


Charities  and  Corrections.  103 

motive  than  economy  the  State  should  certainly  spend  more 
money  on  physicians  who  are  specialists  in  nervous  diseases. 
The  number  of  insane  and  hence  the  cost  of  caring  for  them 
are  increasing  so  rapidly  that  it  would  certainly  seem  a  wise 
policy  to  spend  more  money  in  an  effort  to  cure  these  pa- 
tients when  it  is  costing  annually  $479,967  to  care  for  them. 

II.  SOLDIERS'  HOME. 

Near  Richmond  a  Soldiers'  Home  with  twenty-seven  acres 
of  ground1  was  bought,  paid  for,  and  equipped  in  1884  by 
the  Robert  E.  Lee  Camp  of  Richmond  Confederate  Veterans. 
Other  camps  added  cottages.  By  an  act  approved  March  3, 
1892,  the  State  accepted  the  property  from  the  Robert  E. 
Lee  Camp,  but  possession  was  not  to  be  given  until  1914. 
In  consideration  of  this  gift  the  State  agreed  to  appropriate 
annually  for  the  following  twenty-two  years  the  sum  of 
$150  for  the  support  of  each  inmate  of  the  Home,  unless 
the  number  should  fall  below  fifty,  in  which  event  $200 
per  capita  was  to  be  paid.  The  whole  amount,  however, 
was  not  to  exceed  $30,000  in  any  one  year.  The  State  has, 
of  its  own  accord,  exceeded  this  amount.2  The  Home  has 
been  conducted  by  a  board  composed  of  thirty,  twenty-seven 
selected  by  the  Robert  E.  Lee  Camp  and  three  state  officials. 
The  residents  in  the  fashionable  section  of  the  city  of  Rich- 
mond are  building  on  all  sides  of  the  Home,  and  in  1914 
the  property  will  be  worth  approximately  half  a  million 
dollars. 

III.  PENITENTIARY. 

Management. — Virginia's  first  state  penitentiary  for  soli- 
tary confinement  was  built  in  I797-3  The  plan  for  a  semi- 
circular building  was  proposed  by  Jefferson,  and  the  build- 
ing, with  additions,  still  stands  in  the  center  of  the  prison 

1The  General  Assembly  has  recently  given  six  acres  of  this  tract 
to^the  Confederate  Memorial  Association  for  a  Battle  Abbey. 

In  1910  the  appropriation  was  $46,666.  In  addition  to  this  the 
State  appropriated  $369,373  for  pensions  to  Confederate  soldiers 
throughout  the  State. 

'Acts,  1796,  c.  2,  sec.  17. 


IO4  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

grounds  in  Richmond.  The  institution  has  always  been 
controlled  by  five  directors,  except  from  1867  until  1903 
when  the  number  was  only  three.  Until  1903  the  governor 
appointed  the  directors  annually;  since  that  time  the  five 
have  been  appointed  by  the  governor  for  five  years.  Since 
1871  the  board  has  met  weekly;  and  since  1903  the  law  has 
required  them  to  meet  monthly  at  the  state  farm,  though  in 
practice  they  meet  at  irregular  intervals.  They  have  re- 
ceived a  monthly  report  from  the  superintendent  and  another 
from  the  general  agent,  until  the  latter  office  was  abolished ; 
and  they  make  a  quarterly  report  to  the  governor.  Until 
1903  the  superintendent  was  elected  for  two  years  by  a  joint 
session  of  the  General  Assembly ;  since  1903  he  has  been 
chosen  by  the  board  of  directors  for  four  years.  Until  the 
manufacturing  operations  conducted  by  the.  State  were  dis- 
continued in  1880  he  directed  these  operations  in  addition  to 
his  duties  as  prison  warden. 

Until  the  eighties  a  general  agent  and  storekeeper  was 
elected  every  two  years  by  the  General  Assembly  in  joint 
session.  This  official  purchased  provisions  for  the  prison- 
ers and  all  raw  materials  for  the  manufacturing  enterprises. 
The  raw  materials  were  manufactured  under  the  supervision 
of  the  superintendent ;  but  at  the  end  of  the  week  the  finished 
products  were  returned  to  the  general  agent  and  store- 
keeper, who  sold  them  at  the  prices  set  by  the  directors. 
He  had  to  give  surety,  but  was  not  responsible  for  credit 
given  to  parties  designated  by  the  directors.  For  selling  the 
products  he  received  8  per  cent,  commission  until  1876; 
6  per  cent,  commission  from  then  until  1878;  and  5  per 
cent,  commission  from  1878  until  1884;  though  on  products 
sold  at  auction  his  commission  was  only  2l/2  per  cent.  The 
office  was  lucrative,  and  for  six  years  the  superintendent 
recommended  its  abolishment.  It  was  abolished  in  1884 
upon  the  recommendation  of  the  board  of  directors;  and 
the  duties,  much  reduced  by  the  withdrawal  of  the  State 
from  manufacturing  enterprises,  have  since  been  performed 
by  the  superintendent. 


Charities  and  Corrections.  105 

Conveying  of  Prisoners. — The  cost  of  conveying  prison- 
ers from  the  county  or  city  jails  has  always  been  considered 
a  part  of  the  cost  of  the  penitentiary  to  the  State.  The 
superintendents  in  their  annual  reports  have  frequently,  in 
"  showing  how  much  they  have  earned  for  the  State,"  ex- 
cluded this  item;  but  it  should  be  included,  because  if  the 
central  penitentiary  system  did  not  exist,  this  cost  would 
not  be  incurred.  Before  1873  the  sheriff  and  guard  received 
a  fixed  sum  per  mile  for  conveying  prisoners,  besides  ex- 
penses. In  1873  the  General  Assembly  made  a  rate  of  $3 
a  day  for  the  sheriff,  with  the  payment  of  necessary  ex- 
penses for  himself,  prisoner,  and  a  guard  if  the  court 
ordered  the  latter.  In  1878  the  railroad  commissioner  was 
directed  to  enter  into  two-year  contracts  with  transportation 
companies  for  the  transportation  of  criminals  and  lunatics. 
The  approval  of  the  governor  was  necessary,  and  the  rate 
was  not  to  exceed  2  cents  per  mile  for  each  person.  The 
commissioner  was  to  prescribe  routes.  The  county  clerk 
furnished  the  sheriff  with  a  certificate  for  his  trip  to  the 
penitentiary;  the  state  auditor  furnished  him  with  a  certifi- 
cate for  his  journey  home ;  and  these  certificates  were  turned 
into  the  auditor's  office  at  specified  times  by  the  transporta- 
tion companies.  Since  1896  the  superintendent  has  sent  a 
penitentiary  guard  for  the  prisoner,  but  the  county  sheriff 
may  be  required  to  deliver  the  prisoner  to  a  railroad  station. 

When  county  sheriffs  delivered  prisoners  to  the  peni- 
tentiary, the  sheriff's  bill  usually  included  several  days  of 
sight-seeing  in  Richmond  for  himself  and  one  or  more 
guards.  The  governor  of  the  State  called  attention  to  this 
condition  in  1877  when  the  asylums  for  the  insane  were 
changing  their  methods  of  conveyance.  In  his  message  of 
1892  the  governor  pointed  out  the  fact  that  it  had  cost 
$10,689  to  bring  438  prisoners  to  the  state  penitentiary.  He 
further  showed  that  between  1873  and  l&77>  it  had  cost  the 
State  $16,877  to  bring  337  insane  persons  to  the  Eastern 
Asylum  under  the  care  of  local  officers,  while  from  1886  to 
1890  the  same  number  were  brought  for  $2,593  by  guards 


io6  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

from  the  asylum.  But  in  spite  of  this  showing  no  action 
was  taken  for  six  years.  In  1895  two  ordinary  prisoners 
were  delivered  from  a  county  in  southwest  Virginia,  for 
which  service  a  bill  for  $210  was  presented.  This  excessive 
charge  brought  about  a  reform.  In  the  session  of  the 
General  Assembly  of  1896  the  superintendent  of  the  peni- 
tentiary had  a  bill  introduced  which  provided  that  he  should 
send  a  guard  for  the  prisoners.  Even  in  the  face  of  all  of 
these  facts  the  reform  caused  a  storm  of  opposition.  Blind 
conservatism,  sheriffs  who  had  been  getting  graft,  and  those 
who  opposed  any  surrender  of  government  functions  to  cen- 
tral officers  stood  in  the  way,  but  the  measure  passed.  The 
cost  fell  off  one  half.  In  1895,  the  last  year  under  the  old 
method,  it  cost  $12,780  to  bring  574  prisoners ;  in  1910  it  cost 
$5244  to  bring  692  prisoners.  Railroad  fare  was  the  same 
for  both  years,  and  all  other  items  cost  from  one  third  to 
one  half  more  in  the  latter  year. 

Living  Conditions. — The  records  of  the  penitentiary  were 
destroyed  at  the  evacuation  of  Richmond  in  1865,  but  in 
1871  there  were  828  inmates.  For  economic  reasons  few 
slaves  had  been  sent  to  the  penitentiary;  but  since  the  war 
the  number  of  negro  prisoners  has  constantly  increased,1 
and  today  of  the  2027  prisoners  in  the  penitentiary,  at  the 
state  farm,  and  on  public  roads,  1681  are  negroes.  As  a 
result  of  this  increase  of  convictions  the  penitentiary  has 
always  been  crowded.  Since  1892  the  insane  prisoners  have 
been  moved  to  the  asylums  for  the  insane.  In  1894  there 
were  1200  male  prisoners  in  200  cells,2  so  the  superintendent 
was  allowed  to  use  the  earnings  of  the  institution  to 
purchase  a  $16,000  farm  on  the  James  River.  To  this  farm 
several  hundred  convicts  were  moved,  especially  the  physi- 
cally disabled,  many  of  whom  were  consumptives.  This 
gave  very  little  relief.  Governor  Charles  T.  O'Ferrall  in  his 
message  of  i8983  said:  "The  penitentiary  is  a  disgrace  and 
reproach  to  the  State.  Prior  to  the  late  war  the  number  of 

1  In  1910,  however,  less  were  sentenced  than  in  1909. 
'  Acts,  1893-94,  c.  62. 
"Senate  Journal,  1897-98. 


Charities  and  Corrections.  107 

convicts  confined  in  the  prison  never  exceeded,  I  am  in- 
formed, three  hundred,  while  now  about  thirteen  hundred 
are  crowded  into  it  (very  slightly  enlarged),  in  many  in- 
stances almost  as  thick  as  cattle  in  a  railroad  car,  where  in 
all  seasons,  particularly  in  winter,  they  breathe  the  fetid 
and  poisonous  air,  and  in  summer  pant  for  breath  when 
locked  up  for  the  night."  The  management  was  not  at 
fault. 

The  Richmond  Times  for  January  13,  1901,  stated  that 
during  the  previous  night  three  cells,  taken  at  random,  which 
contained  7422  cubic  feet  of  air,  held  45  men.  This  is  165 
cubic  feet  of  air  per  man  when  scientists  prescribe  1000 
cubic  feet  per  man.  The  sanitation  was  horrible:  bucket 
sewerage,  oil  lamps,  and  single  windows  covered  by  bunks 
In  justification  of  the  management  the  Times,  three  days 
later,  said :  "  There  is  a  regular  merry-go-round  of  white- 
washing and  scrubbing  and  cleaning,  but  the  vermin  in  the 
hundred  year-old  walls  laugh  to  scorn  the  whitewash  brush 
and  the  scrubbing  brush.  They  have  learned  too  well  that 
he  who  fights  and  runs  away  will  live  to  fight  another  day." 
None  of  these  strictures  apply  to  the  women's  building, 
which  was  a  modern  structure.  The  same  year  the  surgeon 
of  the  penitentiary  reported  the  death  rate  for  the  peni- 
tentiary and  state  farm  at  31.68  per  1000  in  spite  of  the  fact 
that  many  who  would  die  if  left  were  pardoned  upon  his 
recommendation.  Considering  the  fact  that  there  were  no 
infants  and  few  very  old  people,  that  convicts  are  usually 
hardened,  and  that  all  are  forcedly  temperate,  this  rate  was 
very  high. 

No  improvement  was  made  until  the  Constitutional  Con- 
vention of  1902  made  fundamental  provisions  for  increased 
revenue.  Since  then  a  new  prison  building  has  been  added 
with  the  most  modern  method  of  ventilation  and  with  a 
lavatory  in  each  cell.  Each  cell  accommodates  two 
prisoners.  With  548  convicts  in  state  road  camps  and 
292  at  the  state  farm,  the  remaining  1182  are  reasonably 
well  quartered  in  the  penitentiary.  In  1910  the  death  rate 


io8  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

among  those  in  the  penitentiary  and  at  the  state  farm  was 
22  per  1000;  in  the  road  camps  13  per  1000;  or  among  all 
state  convicts  19  per  1000.  There  is  no  mess-hall.  As  the 
convicts  file  by  the  rations  booth  they  are  served  rations 
which  they  carry  to  their  cells  to  eat.  There  they  may  sup- 
plement the  prison  diet  with  such  food  as  they  have  pur- 
chased with  money  earned  by  exceeding  the  allotted  task  at 
the  shoe  factory.  Since  1878  the  superintendent  has  been 
allowed  to  task  convicts.  In  1909  the  prisoners  in  the  peni- 
tentiary earned  about  $30,000  for  themselves,  or  an  average 
of  nearly  $30  a  man. 

Little  Effort  to  Reform  Inmates. — The  inmates  are  taught 
no  trade  except  in  the  shoe  factory ;  and  as  this  training  pre- 
pares them  only  for  factory  work,  it  is  of  little  value  to  the 
negroes,  since  shoe  factories  in  Virginia  restrict  employment 
to  whites.  There  is  no  night  school  in  which  the  illiterate 
are  taught  to  read  and  write;  nor  is  good  reading  matter 
furnished  for  those  who  can  read.  There  has  never  been  a 
chaplain,  but  on  Sunday  mornings  and  afternoons  volunteers 
from  the  city  of  Richmond  hold  services  in  a  hall  which 
accommodates  one  half  of  the  inmates.  Since  1878  four 
days  have  been  deducted  from  the  sentence  for  each  month 
that  the  prisoner  has  not  been  submitted  to  punishment. 
This  applies  likewise  to  the  road  force,  including  convicts 
from  jails. 

Since  1898,  upon  the  recommendation  of  the  board  of 
directors,  the  governor  is  empowered  to  grant  a  condi- 
tional pardon  to  any  convict  who  has  served  half  of  his 
term  with  good  behavior.  By  an  act  of  1903  good  behavior 
during  the  last  two  years  was  all  that  was  required.  Since 
1904  the  board  of  directors  have  used  their  discretion  in 
paroling,  on  condition,  the  convicts  who  have  served  half 
their  time,  even  if  they  have  broken  rules.  Even  life  prison- 
ers may  be  paroled  if  they  have  served  ten  or  fifteen  years. 
Since  1906  the  board  have  required  satisfactory  assurance 
that  the  paroled  prisoner  will  not  become  a  subject  of  private 
or  public  charity.  Virginia  is  the  only  state  with  a  parole 


Charities  and  Corrections.  109 

system  and  no  parole  officer.  The  superintendent  of  the 
penitentiary  has  not  had  time  to  keep  in  touch  with  those 
paroled,  and  therefore  exact  information  as  to  the  working 
of  the  system  is  not  available. 

In  1908  an  electric  chair  was  installed.  The  previous 
year  a  large  negro  being  hanged  at  Farmville  twice  broke 
the  rope,  and  a  demand  for  electrocution  was  at  once  voiced 
by  the  press.  The  next  General  Assembly  made  an  appro- 
priation for  the  chair,  and  provided  that  all  felons  to  be 
executed  should  be  brought  to  the  penitentiary  as  soon  as 
convicted.  They  are  executed  by  the  superintendent  or  by 
an  assistant  who  receives  no  extra  compensation.  Only  a 
few  witnesses  are  admitted,  and  newspapers  are  not  allowed 
to  publish  the  details  of  the  execution,  only  the  mere  fact 
being  noted ;  though  in  fact  they  do  publish  details.1 

Employment. — The  Richmond  Whig  for  i87O2  said: 
"  This  institution  from  its  foundation  has  ever  been  a  serious 
burden  upon  the  State  treasury.  When  six  hundred  able- 
bodied  laborers  make  a  loss  there  must  be  something  wrong 
somewhere."  The  same  year  the  governor  of  the  State 
was  authorized  to  hire  convicts,  whose  terms  of  service  did 
not  exceed  ten  years,  for  suitable  public  work  outside  of  a 
town.  In  his  message  of  the  following  winter  he  deplored 
a  penitentiary  loss  of  $70,000  to  the  State.  For  the  next 
decade  the  governor  furnished  convicts  to  railroads,  canals, 
and  quarries,  and  to  counties  for  road  making.  The  coun- 
ties accepted  few.  The  conditions  varied.  The  aim  was 
to  make  the  convicts  self-sustaining,  but  this  was  not  ac- 
complished. The  convicts  were  not  well  cared  for  and  the 
mortality  was  great.  During  the  years  1879  and  1880 
seventy-seven  escaped  from  the  camps;  and  the  camps  con- 
tinued to  be  an  expense  to  the  State.  From  the  close  of  the 
Civil  War  until  1880  manufacturing  by  the  State  had  not 
made  the  penitentiary  self-sustaining.  As  a  matter  purely 
of  dollars  and  cents,  this  incurred  a  heavier  cost  to  the  State 

1  Acts.  1908,  c.  398. 

*  February  19,  1870.    See  also  for  January  9,  1871. 


no  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

than  the  system  of  leasing  the  prisoners  to  outside'  con- 
tractors. The  inmates  were  learning  trades,  however,  and 
were  better  treated  than  those  leased  outside  of  the  peni- 
tentiary. But  unfortunately  the  times  were  so  out  of  joint 
economically  and  politically  during  this  period  that  no  valu- 
able lesson  can  be  drawn. 

In  1880  the  boot  and  shoe  factory  was  turned  over  to 
Davis  and  Company,  a  Massachusetts  firm;  the  barrel 
factory  to  a  Richmond  gentleman;  and  the  other  two 
branches  of  manufacture  were  discontinued.  The  barrel 
factory  was  later  succeeded  by  a  tobacco  factory,  which 
was  run  until  1897;  since  that  time  the  shoe  factory  alone 
has  been  run  inside  the  penitentiary.  This  simple  method 
of  leasing  the  convicts  for  inside  work  proved  more  satis- 
factory and  profitable  than  either  manufacturing  by  the 
State  or  hiring  to  outside  public  works,  and  hence  the 
former  was  discontinued  in  1880  and  the  latter  gradually. 

The  governor  in  his  message  of  1894  said:  "The  ablest 
hands  have  been  hired  to  railroads,  but  no  bonds  were  taken 
for  the  payment  of  their  hire ;  the  statute  did  not  require  it, 
and  much  money  was  lost  because  of  this  failure.  The 
State  clothed,  fed,  guarded  and  supplied  the  convicts  with 
medical  attention  and  medicines,  and  took  in  return  the 
worthless  bonds  or  naked  promises  of  the  various  companies, 
which  have  never  been  redeemed."  Though  counties  could 
have  convicts  at  the  actual  cost  of  supporting  and  guarding 
them,  they  did  not  use  any  considerable  number  at  any 
time  until  recently.  For  instance,  the  governor  mentioned 
the  fact  that  only  fifty  were  used  by  counties  in  1893. 

In  1898  the  penitentiary  board  contracted  with  the  Davis 
Boot  and  Shoe  Company  to  furnish  them  at  least  one  thou- 
sand hands  for  fifteen  years  at  42  cents  a  working  day  for 
men,  and  35  cents  for  women.  The  factory  buildings 
within  the  walls  are  furnished  by  the  State,  and  all  costs 
of  support  and  guarding  are  borne  by  the  State.  The  board 
has  been  criticized  for  this  contract.  But  by  this  system  of 
indoor  contract  work,  at  approximately  the  above  prices,  the 


Charities  and  Corrections.  in 


penitentiary,  during  the  panic  decade  from  1888  to 
had  made  for  the  State  $105,510,  besides  paying  for  the 
state  farm.  As  far  as  can  be  learned,  in  every  decade  in  its 
history,  under  other  systems,  it  had  been  an  expense  to  the 
State.  Counties  would  not  use  the  convicts,  and  the  State 
at  that  time  did  not  have  sufficient  revenue  to  work  them 
on  roads,  and  therefore  the  penitentiary  board  had  to  act 
The  only  question  is  whether  they  could  have  contracted  for 
a  shorter  term. 

According  to  the  state  auditor's  annual  reports,  the  peni- 
tentiary, at  least  since  the  Civil  War,  was  never  self- 
sustaining  (except  during  the  year  1882)  until  the  year 
1889.  During  the  decade  from  1889  to  1898  inclusive  the 
profit  to  the  State  was  $105,510  plus  a  $16,000  farm  as 
mentioned  above.  From  1899  to  1903  inclusive,  $89,600  of 
profits  was  paid  the  State.  The  Constitutional  Convention 
of  1902  separated  the  management  of  the  penitentiary  and 
the  state  farm;  but  since  the  farm  is  largely  a  hospital  for 
the  penitentiary,  the  profit  or  loss  of  the  two  must  be  con- 
sidered jointly  and  separately.  Considered  jointly,  they 
have  cost  the  State  for  support  $144,780  in  excess  of  income. 
Considered  separately  the  penitentiary  has  made  a  profit  of 
$28,391,  the  Farm  has  shown  a  loss  of  $173,171  since  lo/^.1 

Since  the  contract  was  made  in  1898  the  general  level  of 
prices  has  changed  to  the  disadvantage  of  the  penitentiary. 
Wholesale  prices  in  March,  1910,  were  33.8  per  cent,  higher 
than  the  average  prices  for  the  ten  years  from  1890  until 
1 899.2  Had  prices  not  so  changed,  instead  of  a  combined 
deficit  at  the  penitentiary  and  farm  in  1910  of  $32,702 
there  would  have  been  a  profit.  If  the  contract  with  the 
shoe  people  is  renewed  in  1913  by  the  board  of  directors, 
which  has  full  authority,  the  term  of  years  need  not  be  so 
long,  as  the  buildings,  machinery,  and  trained  labor  are 

*In  1910  the  penitentiary  showed  a  loss  of  $5182;  the  farm, 
$27,520.  In  all  the  above  profits  and  losses  the  item  of  new  build- 
ings has  not  been  included.  These  have  cost  the  State  at  least 
$276,827  since  the  Civil  War. 

*  Bulletin  of  the  United  States  Bureau  of  Labor,  No.  87,  March, 
1910. 


H2  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

already  in  place.'  Also  the  wages  received  for  the  work 
of  the  convicts  should  be  at  least  one  third  more  than  at 
present.  The  counties  should  be  furnished  as  many  con- 
victs as  they  will  use  on  the  roads ;  but  long-term  prisoners 
should  be  worked  within  the  walls. 

State  Farm. — When  a  farm  was  purchased  on  the  James 
River  in  1894,  it  was  thought  that  this  could  be  made  a  self- 
sustaining  asylum  for  those  physically  weak,  if  the  nine 
hundred  acres  were  worked  by  able-bodied  men.  But  dis- 
appointment has  resulted.  Guarding  the  prisoners  in  the 
fields  is  expensive,  and  the  farm  did  not  lend  itself  to  in- 
tensive trucking.  The  annual  report  of  the  superintendent 
of  the  farm  is  regularly  a  history  of  spring  freshets  and 
fall  droughts. 

Until  1899  the  farm  was  supervised  by  the  superintendent 
of  the  penitentiary.  From  1899  until  1903  a  manager  was 
appointed-  by  the  governor,  but  he  was  under  the  control'  of 
the  superintendent  of  the  penitentiary.  The  Constitutional 
Convention  thought  it  best  to  locate  the  responsibility,  and 
since  1903  an  independent  superintendent  of  the  farm  has 
been  elected  for  a  term  of  four  years  by  the  board  of 
directors  of  the  penitentiary  and  state  farm.  In  addition 
to  farming,  the  convicts  have  worked  a  quarry  and  have 
crushed  stone  for  sale.  Like  the  former  state-managed 
enterprises,  this  has  not  been  an  unqualified  success.  In 
1910  out  of  an  average  prison  population  on  the  farm  of 
287,  not  more  than  75  were  able  to  work. 

Convict  Road  Force. — In  1906  an  act  provided  that  a 
prisoner  convicted  of  felony  and  sentenced  for  two  years  or 
less  might  be  sentenced  to  "  hard  labor  on  public  roads," 
and  turned  over  to  the  superintendent  of  the  penitentiary,  to 
be  kept  as  a  member  of  the  state  convict  road  force.  In 
1908  this  provision  was  extended  to  include  all  prisoners  sen- 
tenced for  five  years  or  less.  The  state  highway  com- 
missioner, who  fills  a  new  office  created  in  1906,  makes 
requisition  on  the  superintendent  of  the  penitentiary  for 
so  many  convicts  sentenced  to  hard  labor;  but  the  convicts 


Chanties  and  Corrections.  113 

are  still  guarded,  fed,  and  clothed  by  the  superintendent  of 
the  penitentiary.1  In  1910  the  total  cost  per  convict  to  the 
State,  including  transportation,2  was  66  cents  per  day. 
Medical  attendance  must  be  furnished  by  the  county  in 
which  the  force  is  working.  In  1911  the  state  appropria- 
tion for  the  maintenance  of  this  convict  force  was  $70,000. 
These  convicts  are  furnished  free  to  counties  provided  the 
work  done  is  permanent  and  is  done  under  the  supervision 
of  the  state  highway  commissioner.  The  commissioner 
appoints  an  engineer  for  the  work,  who  receives  not  more 
than  $1,200  a  year.  The  labor  of  the  convicts,  estimated  at 
$i  a  day,  must  not  exceed  40  per  cent,  of  the  total  cost  of 
the  road  to  the  county  or  locality. 

In  "Virginia  the  minimum  sentence  in  the  penitentiary  is 
one  year,3  but  in  the  road  camps  jail  convicts  are  also  used. 
While  a  prisoner  is  in  jail  awaiting  trial  he  is  permitted  to 
work  in  one  of  the  camps.  If  he  is  afterwards  convicted,  he 
gets  credit  for  the  time  he  has  worked;  if  he  is  declared 
innocent,  he  receives  50  cents  a  day  for  the  work  done.4 
After  conviction,  all  except  short-term  prisoners  are  ex- 
pected to  be  sent  to  road  forces ;  but  on  September  30,  1910, 
there  were  1,636  idle  persons  in  the  jails  of  the  State.  It 
is  profitable  to  hold  them,  as  the  State  pays  the  jailer  for 
their  board.  If  the  cities  and  counties  were  required  to  pay 
jail  board,  more  of  the  idle  prisoners  would  be  in  the  state 
convict  camps,  where  the  prisoners  are  excellently  provided 
for  and  kept  in  good  health.  In  1911  there  were  thirteen 
of  these  camps,  in  1910  there  were  fourteen.  The  convicts 
in  these  fourteen  camps  worked  for  a  total  number  of 
149,729  ten-hour  days  at  a  cost  to  the  State  of  about  66 
cents  a  day  per  capita.  There  was  an  average  of  49  men 

1The  state  highway  commissioner  may  demand  that  the  superin- 
tendent of  the  penitentiary  dismiss  any  guard  on  the  road  force  who 
is  insubordinate  to  the  engineer's  orders. 

'The  railroads  of  the  State  have  voluntarily  hauled  gangs  of  road 
convicts  free;  but  when  only  a  few  convicts  are  transported,  free 
transportation  is  not  applied  for. 

'There  is  one  dead-letter  law  providing  for  a  six  months'  peni- 
tentiary sentence  in  case  of  fraudulent  voting. 

*This  law  is  not  enforced. 


114  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

to  a  camp.  For  this  work  467  prisoners  were  taken  from 
the  jails  and  420  from  the  penitentiary.1 

In  addition  to  the  $70,000  to  support  convict  forces,  the 
State  in  1911  appropriated  $200,000  from  the  general  fund, 
plus  approximately  $38,088  automobile  tax,  as  a  conditional 
gift  to  road  building.  Counties  which  have  not  applied  for 
a  convict  road  force  have  this  fund  distributed  among  them, 
according  to  population,  for  permanent  road  building,  on 
condition  that  the  county  apply  for  it  and  appropriate  a  like 
amount  to  be  spent  under  the  direction  of  the  state  road 
commissioner.  Only  seven  of  the  seventy-seven  counties 
entitled  to  the  gift  rejected  it,  and  the  $200,000  plus 
approximately  $38,088  was  distributed  among  the  seventy 
according  to  population. 

The  law  in  regard  to  convict  labor  and  that  in  regard 
to  money  aid  are  separate  laws.  The  first  law  is  very  de- 
fective. First,  it  provides  that  the  convicts  sentenced  to 
hard  labor  on  roads  may  not  be  worked  inside  the  peni- 
tentiary. As  a  result  of  this  provision,  when  the  convict 
fund  did  not  hold  out  during  the  winter  of  1910-1911,  a 
number  of  convicts  were  being  fed  in  the  penitentiary  who 
could  not  be  worked  until  several  counties  agreed  to  sup- 
port them  for  their  labor.  Again,  to  work  convicts  econom- 
ically they  must  be  in  large  gangs,  and  for  this  reason  about 
fifty  are  sent  to  the  small  as  well  as  the  large  county.  The 
two  laws  should  be  combined.  The  convict  force  fund 
($70,000  in  1911),  the  state  aid  fund  ($200,000  in  1911), 
the  automobile  tax  fund  (approximately  $38,088  in  1911), 
and  all  convicts  sentenced  to  hard  labor  on  roads  should  con- 
stitute a  total  to  be  distributed  on  the  same  conditions  that 
now  apply  to  the  state  aid  fund.  The  fund  should  be  dis- 
tributed according  to  population.  One  day  of  convict  labor 
should  be  in  lieu  of  a  certain  amount  of  money ;  and  until  all 
convicts  are  engaged,  that  is,  contracted  for,  no  money  should 
be  distributed.  The  value  of  convict  labor  could  be  de- 
termined by  competitive  bidding  on  the  part  of  counties. 

1  Report  of  the  State  Board  of  Charities  and  Corrections,  1910. 


Charities  and  Corrections.  115 

That  is,  the  convict  labor  could  be  furnished  to  the  highest 
bidders  as  long  as  any  road  convicts  remain. 

IV.    REFORMATORIES. 

The  "  Prison  Association  of  Virginia"  was  incorporated  in 
1890  with  thirteen  members,  though  any  one  may  become  a 
member  by  paying  a  nominal  fee.  The  object  of  the  associa- 
tion is  the  improvement  of  the  government,  discipline,  and 
management  of  all  prisons  in  the  State ;  the  amelioration  of 
the  condition  of  prisoners;  the  encouragement  and  aid  of 
discharged  convicts,  and  the  commitment  to  the  association 
of  such  youthful  and  petty  criminals  as  the  State  may  see  fit. 
In  1894  the  association  built  a  reformatory  at  Laurel,  near 
Richmond,  partly  with  state  aid,  but  principally  by  private 
subscriptions.  Since  1896  the  institution  has  received  from 
the  State  25  cents  a  day  for  board,  and  now  receives  $10  per 
annum  for  clothes,  for  each  minor  committed  to  it  by  a 
judge  or  local  magistrate.1  Since  1904  all  minors  have  been 
sentenced  on  indefinite  terms.  The  superintendent,  who  is 
selected  by  the  Prison  Association,  prescribes  a  conditional 
sentence,  as  directed  by  the  association,  according  to  the 
offense.  By  good  behavior  this  term  can  be  shortened;  by 
bad  behavior  it  is  prolonged.  However,  the  Prison  Asso- 
ciation or  the  governor  of  the  State  may  parole  a  boy  at  any 
time  on  condition  of  good  behavior.  The  secretary  of  the 
state  board  of  charities  and  corrections  keeps  track  of  those 
paroled.  During  the  year  1910  the  average  age  of  those 
committed  was  thirteen  and  three  tenths  years.  Of  the  com- 
mitments 54  were  for  incorrigibility ;  4  for  misdemeanor; 
42  for  larceny;  49  for  felonies.  On  March  I,  1911,  there 
were  211  names  on  the  rolls. 

This  institution  is  far  preferable  to  the  state  penitentiary, 
which  still  receives  part  of  the  youthful  offenders  of  the 
State,  but  is  hardly  deserving  the  name  "  reformatory."  In 
fact  it  is  called  "  Laurel  School."  The  boys  go  to  school  for 

1In  1910  and  1911  this  was  supplemented  by  $10,500  per  annum. 
The  state  school  board  contributes  $1000  per  annum  for  teachers. 


n6  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

three  hours  a  day,  but  have  no  study  period  at  night.  Dur- 
ing half  of  each  day  they  work  on  the  farm,  make  cement 
brick,  or  work  in  a  so-called  tailor  shop  where  they  make 
rough  clothing  for  their  own  wear.  They  are  not  taught  a 
trade.  As  the  institution  no  longer  receives  material  aid 
from  the  Prison  Association,  it  should  be  taken  over  by  the 
State  and  placed  under  the  board  of  charities  and  corrections. 
This  statement  does  not  indicate  an  intention  to  under- 
estimate the  noble  work  done  by  the  Prison  Association 
when  the  State  was  in  need.  It  is  simply  pointing  out  a 
need  that  the  Prison  Association  realizes  as  well  as  the 
writer. 

In  1900  a  "  Negro  Reformatory  Association  of  Virginia  " 
was  incorporated  which  has  done  for  the  negro  boys  what 
the  Prison  Association  of  Virginia  has  done- for  the  whites. 
The  State  pays  25  cents  a  day  for  the  support  of  not  more 
than  150  boys.  This  reformatory  has  a  larger  farm,  has 
had  enthusiastic  superintendents,  and  has  been  more  suc- 
cessful than  that  for  the  whites;  and  this  result  has  been 
accomplished  with  meager  support  from  the  State.  In  1910 
a  reformatory  for  white  girls  was  established  at  Cady,  and  it 
now  has  about  25  inmates. 

Board  of  Charities  and  Corrections. — The  General  As- 
sembly of  I9O81  established  a  board  of  charities  and  cor- 
rections, composed  of  five  unpaid  members  appointed  by  the 
governor,  one  annually,  for  terms  of  five  years.  The  board 
met  eleven  times  in  1910.  The  duties  of  the  board  are 
strictly  visitorial  and  advisory,  without  executive  powers. 
The  board  elected  Rev.  Joseph  T.  Mastin  executive  secre- 
tary over  sixteen  applicants,  though  he  had  not  applied  for 
the  position.  His  duties  are  to  visit  state,  county,  city,  and 
private  eleemosynary,  charitable,  or  correctional  institutions 
at  least  once  a  year.  The  secretary  spends  most  of  his  time 
visiting,  leaving  the  office  in  charge  of  an  efficient  assistant 
secretary.  He  has  an  assistant  visitor  who  devotes  most  of 
his  time  to  visiting  the  homes  in  which  children  are  placed 

1  Acts,  1908,  c.  276. 


Charities  and  Corrections.  117 

by  orphanage  societies.  The  members  of  the  board  assign 
themselves  state  institutions  to  visit  twice  a  year.  Local 
visiting  boards  are  also  appointed  for  each  institution. 
Plans  for  jails,  almshouses,  or  reformatories  must  be  sub- 
mitted to  the  secretary  for  suggestions.  The  work  is  worth 
much  more  than  the  annual  appropriation  of  $5000.  The 
powers  of  the  board  should  be  extended,  and  the  work  of 
the  several  reformatory  associations  should  be  centralized  in 
this  board. 


CHAPTER   IV. 

PUBLIC  HEALTH. 

Early  Health  Laws. — A  department  of  public  health  was 
not  established  in  Virginia  until  1908.  The  part  played  by 
the  State  in  relation  to  public  health  is,  however,  worth  relat- 
ing. As  early  as  1777  a  person  with  smallpox  or  other  con- 
tagious disease  was  to  leave  the  road  as  another  approached, 
and,  like  the  lepers  of  old,  cry  "  Unclean,  unclean ; "  in 
other  words,  warn  the  one  who  approached.1  In  1814  the 
governor  of  the  State  was  authorized  to  appoint  a  vaccine 
agent  in  the  city  of  Richmond  who  should,  furnish  vaccine 
free  by  mail  to  any  citizen  of  the  State;  and  for  this  pur- 
pose $600  per  annum  was  appropriated.2  The  office  of  vac- 
cine agent  was  abolished  in  182 1,3  but  was  revived  in  1832.* 
From  this  time  until  1890,  when  the  office  was  finally  abol- 
ished, vaccine  was  distributed  free,  at  a  cost  to  the  State 
never  exceeding  $750  per  annum. 

In  1853  provision  was  made  for  the  registration  of  births 
and  deaths.5  The  commissioners  of  the  revenue,  who  made 
an  annual  assessment  of  property,  were  allowed  ten  cents 
for  every  birth  or  death  reported.  The  nature  of  the  birth 
and  the  cause  of  the  death  were  reported,  and  physicians 
were  required  to  keep  a  record  of  deaths  from  which  the 
commissioners  might  check.  This  was  repealed  in  1898, 
since  which  time  neither  births  or  deaths  have  been  regis- 
tered. 

From  1860  until  1882  any  overseer  of  the  poor  might 
cause  any  person  to  be  vaccinated  at  the  expense  of  the 
county.6  Since  1882  the  common  council  of  the  city  or  town 

1  Acts,  1777,  c.  5. 
"Acts,  1813-14,0. 14. 
•Acts,  1 820-2 1, c. 8. 
*  Acts,  1832,  c.  25. 
"  Acts,  1852-53,  c.  25. 
8  Code,  1860,  c.  86,  s.  15. 

118 


Public  Health.  119 

and  the  county  board  of  supervisors  have  had  authority  to 
compel  all  persons  to  be  vaccinated,  paying  for  such  as  are 
unable  to  pay.1  In  1894  the  General  Assembly  enacted  that 
no  pupils  should  be  admitted  to  public  free  schools  unless 
they  had  been  vaccinated,  "  provided  that  this  provision  may 
be  suspended  in  whole  or  in  part  by  the  school  board  of  any 
city  or  of  any  district."2  Two  thirds  of  the  school  children 
are  today  (1909)  not  vaccinated.3 

Board  of  Health. — In  1872  a  state  board  of  health  and 
vital  statistics  was  created,  which  consisted  of  seven  physi- 
cians appointed  by  the  governor  of  the  State  for  a  term  of 
four  years.  They  held  quarterly  meetings  in  Richmond. 
The  duties  were :  to  communicate  with  local  boards  of  health, 
with  hospitals,  asylums,  and  public  institutions ;  make  sani- 
tary investigations  and  inquiries  respecting  the  causes  of 
disease ;  and  devise  a  scheme  whereby  medical  and  vital  sta- 
tistics might  be  obtained.  They  were  specifically  authorized 
to  report  as  to  the  effect  of  intoxicating  liquor  as  a  beverage 
upon  the  industry,  happiness,  health,  and  lives  of  the  citizens 
of  the  State.4  A  proviso  which  made  this  law  appear  more 
like  a  dream,  declared :  "  Provided  that  the  board  of  health 
shall  not  in  any  way  be  a  charge  upon  the  State."  In  1896 
the  board  was  given  power  to  adopt  such  rules  and  regula- 
tions and  issue  such  orders  as  might  be  necessary  to  prevent 
the  spread  of  contagious  and  infectious  diseases ;  and  an  ap- 
propriation of  $2000  per  annum  was  made  to  pay  the  salary 
of  a  permanent  secretary  to  reside  in  Richmond,  a  per  diem 
of  $4  for  members  of  the  board  while  attending  meetings, 
and  incidentals.5 

Four  years  later  the  Medical  Society  of  Virginia  was  al- 
lowed to  nominate  the  members  of  the  state  board,  from 
whom  the  governor  continued  to  appoint.6  The  same  act 
created  county  boards  of  health.  The  judge  of  each  county 

1  Acts,  1881-82,  c.  166. 

'  Acts,  1893-94,  c.  843. 

'Annual  Report,  Health  Commissioner,  1909. 

4  Acts,  1871-72,  c.  91. 

"Acts,  1895-96,  c.  612. 

"Acts,  1899-1900,  c.  1146. 


I2O  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

or  corporation  was  to  appoint  biennially  three  physicians, 
recommended  by  the  County  Medical  Association,  if  such  a 
society  existed ;  and  these  three  with  the  clerk  of  the  court 
and  the  chairman  of  the  board  of  supervisors  composed  the 
local  board  of  health.  The  board  was  given  power  to  com- 
pel vaccination  and  quarantine,  and  was  obliged  to  report 
monthly  to  the  state  board.  The  secretary  of  the  local  board 
was  health  officer  of  the  city,  town,  or  county.  If  such 
boards  were  not  appointed,  the  state  board  could  appoint 
agents  to  be  paid  by  the  local  government. 

While  this  state  board  was  slowly  evolving,  six  other 
boards  which  are  concerned  with  public  health  have  come 
into  existence.  The  board  of  medical  examiners  was  cre- 
ated in  I884,1  the  board  of  pharmacy  and  also  the  board 
of  dentistry  in  i886,2  the  board  of  embalmers  in  i894,3  and 
the  board  of  examiners  of  graduate  nurses  in  1903.*  All  of 
these  boards  are  nominated  by  the  respective  professional 
societies,  and  are  appointed  by  the  governor  of  the  State. 
They  are  no  expense  to  the  state  treasury,  as  each  is  sup- 
ported by  examination  or  license  fees,  including  nominal 
annual  registration  fees ;  and  no  person  may  practice  one  of 
the  above  professions  without  satisfying  the  conditions  of 
the  proper  board  and  keeping  up  his  annual  registration. 
In  1910  the  General  Assembly,  upon  a  recommendation  of 
the  State  Dental  Association,  passed  an  act  requiring  all 
future  candidates  for  the  profession  of  dentistry  also  to  pass 
an  examination  for  the  practice  of  medicine.8  There  is  also 
a  board  of  plumbers  consisting  of  four  in  each  city  of  more 
than  eight  thousand  inhabitants.  The  members  are  appointed 
by  the  city  council,  and  the  inspectors  are  paid  by  the  city, 
though  each  plumber  must  pass  a  practical  examination  and 
pay  an  annual  registration  fee  of  fifty  cents.6  This  last 

1  Acts,  1883-84,  c.  48. 
|  Acts,  1885-86,  c.  223 ;  c.  364. 
Acts,  1893-94,  c.  625. 

4  Acts,  1902-03-04,  c.  191. 

5  Acts,  1910,  c.  178. 
"Acts,  1901-2. 


Public  Health.  121 

provision  is  a  scheme  on  the  part  of  labor  unions  to  exclude 
"  scabs,"  especially  negro  "  scabs." 

Since  1877  there  has  been  a  board  of  quarantine  commis- 
sioners for  Elizabeth  River  and  its  branches,  composed  of 
seven  physicians,  appointed  by  the  governor  of  the  State  for 
two  years  without  pay.  The  board  appoints  one  or  more 
assistants  who  examine  all  incoming  vessels.  The  assistants 
are  paid  from  a  fee  of  $7  on  each  vessel  inspected.1  Since 
1898  they  have  also  had  power  to  inspect  railroad  trains 
when  there  is  suspicion  of  contagious  diseases.2 

During  the  last  two  decades  a  number  of  public  health 
measures  have  been  enacted  without  provision  for  any  state 
officer  to  enforce  them.  In  1892  a  fine  was  enacted  for  the 
pollution  of  water  used  for  the  supply  of  cities  and  towns.8 
The  same  year  it  was  made  unlawful  to  make,  sell,  or  serve 
oleomargarine,4  but  this  law  was  modified  to  the  extent  that 
the  product  must  always  be  labeled  oleomargarine,  even  by 
a  poster  in  hotels  or  restaurants  where  it  is  served.  Another 
law  the  same  year  required  the  railroad  agent,  when  a  corpse 
is  to  be  transported,  to  take  a  certificate  from  the  under- 
taker and  the  local  health  officer  or  physician  testifying  as 
to  the  nature  of  the  disease  from  which  the  patient  died  and 
the  precautions  taken.5  Since  1904  the  consent  of  the  state 
board  is  required  before  transportation  in  certain  cases  of 
contagious  diseases.6  The  same  General  Assembly  appro- 
priated $2000  for  free  treatment  of  the  eyes  of  the  poor  of 
the  state  in  a  Richmond  charitable  hospital.  A  county 
physician  and  county  judge  had  to  testify  to  the  needs  of  the 
applicant.7  This  appropriation  was  not  continued.  In  1896 
it  was  provided  that  animals  dying  of  contagious  diseases 
must  be  buried  or  burnt;  and  if  this  was  not  done  by  the 
owner,  the  justice  of  the  peace  could  have  the  same  done  at 


1876-77,  c.  114. 
1  Acts,  1897-98,  c.  538. 
"Acts,  1891-92,  c.  460. 
4  Acts,  1891-92,  c.  526. 
"Acts,  1891-92,  c.  578. 
*  Acts,  1902-03-04,  c.  607. 
TActs,  1891-92,  c.  608. 


122  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

the  expense  of  the  owner.1  In  1898  an  act  providing  for  a 
fine  of  from  $20  to  $200  and  the  forfeiture  of  the  candy  was 
enacted  against  the  manufacturer  of  candy  adulterated  with 
terra  alba,  barytes,  talc,  or  other  deleterious  substances.2  In 
1906  it  was  made  a  fineable  offense  to  expectorate  in  public 
places  or  on  the  sidewalk.3  In  1908  peanut  cleaning  estab- 
lishments and  cotton  factories  were  required  to  furnish  each 
employee  with  a  mouth  sponge  at  cost.4 

In  1900  the  board  of  agriculture  was  authorized  to  en- 
force the  pure  food  laws,  and  to  accept  all  Federal  classi- 
fications and  make  additional  ones.5  In  1903  $2000  was 
appropriated  to  enforce  the  pure  food  law.6  In  1908  it  was 
provided  that  the  sheriff,  superintendent,  or  other  person  in 
charge  of  any  prison,  almshouse,  hospital,  or  other  insti- 
tution deriving  the  whole  or  a  part  of  its  support  from  the 
state  must  have  any  person  suspected  of  consumption  ex- 
amined; the  patient  must  be  segregated  within  forty-eight 
hours,  the  room  occupied  by  the  patient  must  be  fumigated, 
and  the  state  board  notified  of  the  case.7 

Department  of  Public  Health. — In  1908  the  General  As- 
sembly created  a  department  of  public  health  with  an  annual 
appropriation  of  $40,000,  and  a  new  state  board  of  health 
superseded  the  old  one.  The  present  board  consists  of  twelve 
men  who  must  be  members  of  the  State  Medical  Society. 
The  governor  appoints  three  annually  to  serve  for  four 
years,  and  one  must  live  in  each  congressional  district,  with 
two  additional  ones  from  the  city  of  Richmond.  "The 
board  may  adopt  by-laws  for  their  government  and  make 
such  rules  and  regulations  not  inconsistent  with  the  law  as 
they  may  deem  proper." 

The  governor  also  appoints  a  commissioner  at  a  salary  of 
$3500  for  a  term  of  four  years  who  acts  as  the  executive 

*Acts,  1895-96,  c.  327. 

2  Acts,  1897-98,  c.  56. 

8  Acts,  1906,  c.  302. 

4  Acts,  1908,  c.  228. 

"Acts,  1899,  1900,  c.  655. 

'Acts,  1902-03-04,  c.  87. 

'Acts,  1908,  c.  41. 


Public  Health.  123 

officer  of  the  state  board.  The  health  commissioner  with  the 
approval  of  the  state  board  appoints  assistants.  At  present 
the  department  is  organized  into  seven  bureaus,  as  follows : 
administration,  rural  sanitation,  Catawba  Sanatorium,  lab- 
oratory, education  and  publicity,  inspections,  and  sanitary 
engineering.  Each  bureau  is  in  charge  of  a  salaried  head 
who  is  responsible  for  the  work  of  his  bureau.  The  mem- 
bers of  the  board  receive  a  per  diem  of  $8  while  actually 
engaged  in  the  work  of  the  board,  with  mileage.  The 
board  maintains  laboratories  in  Richmond  for  the  free 
examination  of  clinical  material  submitted  by  members  of 
the  medical  profession  of  the  State,  and  for  research  in  and 
study  of  infectious  diseases,  epidemics,  and  methods  of  pre- 
venting and  curing  diseases.  The  board  is  also  directed  to 
locate  sanatoriums  for  the  treatment  of  tuberculosis,  where 
state  patients  may  be  treated  at  the  minimum  expense.1 

The  department  was  organized  in  the  summer  of  1908. 
Owing  to  the  limited  powers  of  the  board  of  health  and  the 
health  commissioner  it  was  thought  best  to  begin  with  an 
educational  campaign.  Since  then  the  Virginia  Health 
Bulletin  has  been  issued  monthly  in  editions  of  ten  thousand 
or  more  copies ;  and  these  are  distributed  free  to  the  public 
health  officers,  physicians,  preachers,  and  teachers,  and  in 
some  cases  to  every  name  on  the  poll  books  of  districts  where 
there  is  an  infectious  disease.  The  bulletins  deal  with  preva- 
lent diseases  and  sanitary  measures  in  general.  A  number 
of  circulars  on  "  Bedside  care  of  Infectious  Diseases  "  were 
sent  to  each  physician  to  distribute  where  needed.  A  bound 
volume  of  these  health  bulletins  is  sent  with  each  state  cir- 
culating library. 

Hundreds  of  lectures,  usually  illustrated,  have  been  given 
by  the  commissioner  and  assistant  commissioner.  The 
method  by  which  the  bureau  of  education  and  publicity  util- 
izes the  newspapers  of  the  State  is  so  suggestive  to  propa- 
gandists that  we  shall  quote  a  passage  from  the  1910  Annual 
Report  of  the  Commissioner  of  Health:  "We  have  several 
canons  for  the  publication  of  weekly  news.  These  are,  first, 

1Acts,  1908,0.361. 


124  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

let  the  items  be  news.  They  must,  of  course,  carry  strong 
health  teachings,  if  they  accomplish  our  purposes,  but  they 
must  be  couched  in  such  form  as  to  give  them  a  real  news 
value.  Second,  the  news  must  be  so  sent  that  it  can  be 
printed  simultaneously  everywhere  in  the  State,  without 
preference  for  any  locality  or  any  paper.  Third,  the  news 
must  reach  the  weekly  papers  in  time  to  be  of  service  to 
them.  Fourth,  the  news,  when  it  leaves  this  office  must  be 
'  ready  for  the  hook,'  that  is,  it  must  be  in  such  newspaper 
form  as  to  require  no  editorial  revision  of  any  sort. 

"  The  bureau  conforms  to  these  requirements  in  a  manner 
which  is  at  least  simple.  The  director  of  the  bureau,  him- 
self a  former  newspaper  man,  selects  from  the  news  of  the 
department  and  from  our  exchanges  those  items  which 
appeal  to  him  as  possessing  a  news  as  well  as  an  educational 
value.  These  are  prepared  with  great  care,  and  are  sup- 
plied with  'set  heads'  which  are  in  general  use  among  the 
newspapers  of  the  State.  These  heads  are  accompanied  by 
'guide  lines,'  so  that  the  city  telegraph  editor  can  tell  at  a 
glance  whether  or  not  he  has  headline  type  suited  to  the 
heads.  As  this  is  the  case  in  at  least  ninety  per  cent,  of  the 
newspaper  offices  in  the  State,  the  average  editor  has  no 
delay  in  revising  our  copy.  Furthermore,  a  uniform  '  re- 
lease date '  for  the  whole  State  is  attached  to  every  clipping 
sheet  sent  out,  so  that  any  newspaper  can  print  any  item  at 
the  proper  time,  with  the  assurance  that  no  other  paper  has 
'  scooped '  it.  To  meet  any  possible  need,  we  supply  a  num- 
ber of  small  news  items  every  week  which  have  no  release 
date,  are  concise  in  form  and  can  be  used  as  fillers  by  a 
busy  editor. 

"  The  director  is  glad  to  report  that  this  system  is  work- 
ing admirably,  and  from  the  exchanges  which  come  to  this 
office,  he  is  safe  in  saying  that  at  least  200  health  items  are 
printed  weekly  in  the  State  by  practically  all  of  the  daily  and 
weekly  papers.  We  attach  great  importance  to  the  value  of 
these  items  since  they  are  far  more  widely  read  than  any 
bulletins  we  might  issue,  no  matter  how  large  the  editions. 


Public  Health.  125 

Indeed,  we  believe  that  few  persons  in  the  State  who  read 
any  particular  papers,  daily  or  weekly,  fail  to  see,  at  least 
once  a  week,  that  some  dangerous  disease  can  be  prevented. 

"  In  this  connection  the  bureau  can  not  too  strongly  urge 
upon  health  departments  of  other  states  and  health  workers 
generally,  the  proper  use  of  the  newspapers.  It  is  not  diffi- 
cult to  ascertain  the  wants  of  the  press,  which  are  by  no 
means  unreasonable,  and  when  these  are  met,  health  workers 
have  an  ally  second  to  none  in  point  of  influence  and  genuine 
public  service." 

In  1910,  1079  free  laboratory  examinations  were  made  for 
the  physicians  of  the  State  for  typhoid  fever;  1379  for 
diphtheria;  1586  for  tuberculosis;  223  for  hookworm;  80 
miscellaneous;  and  433  specimens  of  water  were  analyzed 
for  health  officers,  physicians,  and  civil  authorities. 

The  board  furnishes  diphtheria  antitoxin  and  vaccine 
virus  to  health  officers  at  a  minimum  cost,  and  fumigating 
materials,  with  directions  for  use,  are  sent  to  any  individual 
at  a  small  cost.  Under  the  original  arrangement  between  the 
department  and  the  manufacturers  of  diphtheria  antitoxin, 
the  reduced  rates  were  not  to  apply  to  any  persons  except 
those  to  whom  its  purchase  at  the  regular  retail  rates  would 
be  a  hardship.  This  is  the  usual  arrangement  in  other 
States;  but  it  was  found  difficult  to  live  up  to  this  agree- 
ment, since  the  antitoxin  was  dispensed  through  local 
boards  of  health.  Accordingly,  the  manufacturers  were 
induced  to  remove  the  restrictions,  so  that  now  any  one  can 
secured  it  at  the  reduced  price.1  The  boards  of  health  in 
many  counties  order  it  from  the  state  department  and  keep 
it  on  hand  for  distribution.2  The  counties  furnish  it  free 

Regular  manufacturer's  list  price.  State  price. 

1000  Unit  Dose $2.00  $0.49 

2000  3.50  0.89 

3000        5.00        1.29 

5000       7.50       1.89 

2  It  may  be  exchanged  for  fresh  at  the  following  rates : 
1000  Unit  Dose  $0.10 

2OOO  O.2O 

3000 0.30 

5000  "   "  0.40 


126  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

to  the  poor,  at  cost  to  others.  The  local  board,  or  the  doctor 
who  orders  it,  is  responsible  for  the  purchase  price.  The 
department  reports  shipments  to  the  manufacturer,  who  in 
turn  renders  a  bill  to  the  local  board  or  doctor  at  the  state 
rates.  In  1910,  18,318,000  units  of  this  antitoxin  were  dis- 
tributed, and  the  quantity  will  greatly  increase  as  the  people 
learn  that  the  quality  is  identically  the  same  as  that  of  any 
other  diphtheria  antitoxin,  since  it  is  standardized  by  the 
Federal  Government. 

This  arrangement  of  the  department  has  made  possible 
the  distribution  of  this  antitoxin  for  nearly  $25,000  less  than 
it  would  have  cost  the  consumers  through  the  former  chan- 
nels of  distribution;  and  since  no  diphtheria  antitoxin  is 
prepared  within  the  State,  there  was  an  absolute  saving  to 
the  people  of  the  State  of  about  $15,000.  That  is,  the  18,- 
318,000  units  were  purchased  through  the  department  for 
$15,000  less  than  druggists  of  the  State  would  have  paid  for 
the  same  amount  and  quality.1  The  total  cost  of  the  health 
department  for  1910,  exclusive  of  the  Catawba  Tubercular 
Sanatorium,  was  only  $21,370. 

The  Catawba  Sanatorium  for  consumptives  was  estab- 
lished in  1910  near  Roanoke,  where  state  patients  only  are 
received  at  $5  a  week  for  board,  lodging,  nursing,  and  medi- 
cal attention.  Thirty  patients,  the  present  capacity,  are  now 
being  treated. 

In  1910  the  General  Assembly  greatly  strengthened  the 
powers  of  the  state  board  by  an  act  which  we  must  quote 
in  part  verbatim :  "  The  State  Board  of  Health  shall  have 
the  power  to  make,  adopt,  promulgate  and  enforce  reason- 
able rules  and  regulations  from  time  to  time  requiring  and 
providing  for  the  thorough  sanitation  and  disinfection  of  all 
passenger  cars,  sleeping  cars,  steam  boats  and  other  vehicles 
of  transportation  in  this  state  and  also  of  all  convict  camps, 
penitentiaries,  jails,  hotels,  schools  and  other  places  used 
by  or  open  to  the  public;  to  provide  for  the  care,  segre- 

1  Druggists  in  the  State,  with  a  few  exceptions,  pay  the  regular  list 
prices,  that  is,  $7.50  for  a  5000  Unit  Dose,  less  25  per  cent,  discount. 


Public  Health.  127 

gation  and  isolation  of  persons  having,  or  suspected  of 
having,  any  communicable,  contagious  or  infectious  disease ; 
to  regulate  the  method  of  disposition  of  garbage  or  sewerage 
and  any  like  refuse  matter  in  or  near  any  incorporated  town, 
city,  or  unincorporated  town  or  village  of  this  State;  to 
provide  for  the  thorough  investigation  and  study  of  the 
causes  of  all  diseases,  epidemic  and  otherwise,  in  this  State, 
and  the  means  for  the  prevention  of  contagious  diseases, 
and  the  publication  and  distribution  of  such  information  as 
may  contribute  to  the  preservation  of  the  public  health,  and 
the  prevention  of  disease ;  to  make  separate  orders  and  rules 
to  meet  any  emergency,  not  provided  for  by  general  rules 
and  regulations,  for  the  purpose  of  suppressing  nuisances 
dangerous  to  the  public  health  and  communicable,  contagious 
and  infectious  diseases  and  other  dangers  to  the  public  life 
and  health."1 

Another  law  passed  in  1910  requires  every  physician  to 
report  all  cases  of  infectious,  contagious,  communicable  dis- 
ease to  the  executive  officer  of  the  county,  city,  or  town, 
upon  a  blank  furnished  by  the  state  board.2  Another  law 
of  the  same  session  requires  the  state  board  to  inspect  every 
hotel  of  the  State  once  a  year;  this  inspection  is  to  be  paid 
for  by  a  fee  of  twenty-five  cents  for  every  room  inspected, 
provided  that  no  hotel  shall  pay  more  than  ten  dollars.  The 
details  of  inspection  are  numerous.  Sheets  must  be  changed 
after  each  guest,  and  must  be  ninety-six  inches  long  so  as 
absolutely  to  prevent  the  occupant  of  the  bed  from  coming 
in  contact  with  the  blanket.  All  rooms  must  be  fumigated 
twice  a  year.3  The  inspection  was  begun  in  the  fall  of  1910. 
The  only  feature  of  the  inspection  law  which  has  caused  any 
considerable  complaint  is  the  feature  requiring  the  use  of 
sheets  ninety-six  inches  long,  and  the  requirement  that  rates 
be  posted  in  the  hotel  lobbies.  The  inspector  has  refused 

1  Acts,  1910,  c.  179. 

2  Acts,  1910,  c.  66. 
"Acts,  1910,  c.  229. 


128  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

to  issue  certificates  until  all  requirements  are  complied  with, 
but  has  not  yet  prosecuted  those  who  are  dilatory  in  com- 
plying, on  the  ground  that  some  leniency  should  be  shown 
with  reference  to  details  for  the  first  year,  in  order  that  the 
adjustment  may  come  with  the  least  friction. 


CHAPTER  V. 

AGRICULTURE. 

Ante-Bellum. — During  the  ante-bellum  days  of  slavery, 
legislation  was  not  often  resorted  to  in  Virginia  as  a  direct 
means  of  promoting  or  protecting  agricultural  pursuits.  In 
fact,  for  more  than  a  decade  after  the  war  there  was  little 
direct  state  participation  in  matters  relating  to  agriculture, 
such  legislation  as  there  was  being  of  the  most  elementary 
nature.  For  instance,  in  1870  the  General  Assembly  pro- 
vided that,  "  whenever  any  Spanish,  Mexican,  Texan,  or 
Indian  cattle  arrive  within  this  state"  during  the  summer 
season,  the  county  judge  is  authorized  to  appoint  a  board  of 
cattle  inspectors,  composed  of  three  "  discreet  persons,"  to 
determine  whether  such  cattle  are  infected  with  the  Texan 
or  Spanish  fever.  If  the  board  found  the  cattle  to  be  in- 
fected, it  was  to  have  the  county  sheriff  kill  the  cattle  at  the 
expense  of  the  owners.  Each  member  of  the  board  received 
two  dollars  for  each  day  he  was  actually  employed.  But 
at  the  end  of  the  act  was  a  proviso  exempting  from  the  act 
all  cattle  already  in  the  State.1 

Department  of  Agriculture. — In  1877  a  "department  of 
agriculture"  was  created;  an  appropriation  of  $5000  per 
annum  was  made,  the  first  money  appropriated  by  the  State 
for  the  direct  promotion  of  agriculture.  A  commissioner 
was  appointed  by  the  governor  for  a  term  of  two  years,  with 
a  salary  of  $1500  per  annum.  The  commissioner  appointed 
his  own  clerk  and  was  authorized  to  appoint  a  geologist  and 
a  chemist.  His  duties  were  first,  to  prepare  a  geological 
handbook  of  the  State ;  second,  to  analyze  soils  and  samples 
of  each  brand  of  fertilizer  sold  in  the  State ;  third,  to  prepare 
in  Richmond  a  cabinet  of  state  minerals ;  fourth,  to  examine 
questions  of  interest  to  horticulturalists,  fruit  growers, 


1  Acts,  1869-70,  c.  374. 

9  129 


130  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

dairymen,  and  sheep  raisers;  fifth,  to  provide  for  the  dis- 
tribution of  seeds  furnished  by  the  Federal  Government.1 

In  1888  a  "board  of  agriculture  and  immigration"  was 
created.  It  was  composed  of  one  member  (whose  principal 
occupation  was  agriculture),  from  each  of  the  ten  con- 
gressional districts  of  the  State,  appointed  by  the  governor 
for  four  years ;  and  not  more  than  two  thirds  of  the  members 
could  be  selected  from  the  same  political  party.  The  de- 
partment of  agriculture  was  placed  under  the  control  and 
management  of  this  board.  The  commissioner  of  agricul- 
ture, as  ex-officio  member  of  the  board,  acted  as  secretary 
and  treasurer.  The  board  met  annually;  and  the  annual 
appropriation  for  the  department  was  increased  from  $5000 
to  $io,ooo.2 

The  department  of  agriculture  has  never  been  thoroughly 
reorganized.  When  new  agricultural  functions  were  under- 
taken, a  new  officer  was  engrafted,  or  the  function  was  given 
to  another  department  of  government.  The  constitution  of 

1902  provides  that  the  commissioner  of  agriculture  shall  be 
elected  every  four  years  by  the  voters  of  the  State.     Until 

1903  the  board  met  once  each  year;  since  1908  it  has  met 
each  year  three  times.     One  third  of  its  members  must  be 
from  the  minority  political  party.     The  revenue  for  the  de- 
partment  has  gradually   increased,   but  has   been   derived 
mainly  from  special  registration  and  inspection  fees.3 

Fertilizer  Inspection. — In  1871  a  law  was  enacted  requir- 
ing all  packages  of  fertilizers  sold  in  the  State  to  bear  a 
stamped  or  printed  label,  giving  the  name  of  the  manu- 
facturer, the  weight  of  the  contents,  and  the  percentage  of 
chemical  constituents.  Any  person  selling  fertilizers  un- 
labeled  or  mislabeled  was  subject  to  a  fine  of  $100  for  the 
first  offense  and  $200  for  subsequent  offenses.  One  half  of 
the  fine  was  to  go  to  the  informer,  the  other  half  to  the 
State.  Any  purchaser  of  fertilizers  improperly  labeled 

1  Acts,  1876-77,  c.  249. 
1  Acts,  1887-88,  c.  433. 

'The  fertilizer  tax,  $51,661  in  1910,  is  the  entire  source  of  revenue, 
except  an  infinitesimal  fee  from  lime. 


Agriculture.  131 

could  recover  the  purchase  price.  If  bought  from  one  re- 
siding outside  of  the  State,  the  purchaser  could  proceed  by 
attachment  against  any  property  found  within  the  limits  of 
the  State.1  It  was  easy  enough  for  the  manufacturer  to- 
stamp  certain  formulas  upon  the  packages,  but  unless  he  was 
sufficiently  honest  to  do  so  without  a  law,  there  was  little 
incentive,  as  a  result  of  this  act,  for  him  to  stamp  the  correct 
constituents.  How  many  farmers  know  how  or  where  to 
have  fertilizer  analyzed?  And  even  if  they  know,  the  ex- 
pense of  analysis  is  heavy  for  small  buyers. 

In  1873  the  governor  was  .authorized  to  appoint  a  state 
assayer  and  agricultural  chemist.  He  received  no  salary,  but 
was  paid  by  those  availing  themselves  of  his  services.2 
This,  however,  was  of  little  help  to  the  average  farmer. 
This  legislation  in  regard  to  fertilizers,  like  all  legislation 
that  does  not  provide  for  a  definite  person  to  carry  out  its 
provisions,  accomplished  little. 

An  improvement  upon  the  above  law  was  enacted  in  i89O.3 
A  manufacturer  or  dealer,  before  offering  fertilizer  for  sale 
in  the  State,  had  to  furnish  the  commissioner  of  agriculture 
with  a  sample  of  each  brand.  The  commissioner  had  his 
chemists  analyze  the  same,  and  the  analyses  were  published 
for  the  benefit  of  the  public.  The  cost  of  this  was  defrayed 
by  a  registration  fee  of  $100  for  all  manufacturers  or  for 
dealers  handling  brands  from  factories  which  had  not  paid 
this  registration  fee.  There  was  no  guarantee  that  the 
sample  was  a  fair  one;  and  this  defect  was  not  remedied 
until  1900,  when  field  inspectors  were  appointed.  How- 
ever, any  person  selling  fertilizer  was  obliged,  upon  the 
request  and  in  the  presence  of  the  purchaser  to  seal  and  send 
a  sample  of  such  purchase  to  the  state  chemist  of  the  agri- 
cultural department,  who  analyzed  it,  free  of  cost,  and 
reported  the  ingredients  to  both  parties.  If  the  analysis  fell 
10  per  cent,  in  value  below  the  manufacturer's  represented 
analysis,  the  purchaser  could  recover  the  purchase  price;  or 

1  Acts,  1870-71,  c.  227. 

2  Acts,  1872-73,  c.  146. 
*Acts,  1889-90,  c.  105. 


132  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

if  bought  on  credit,  he  could  refuse  to  pay.  These  fees 
and  fines  prescribed  for  certain  violations  on  the  part  of 
manufacturers  and  dealers  were  considered  part  of  the 
State's  $10,000  appropriation  to  the  department  of  agricul- 
ture. There  was  still  no  special  officer  to  enforce  the  law, 
-though  the  enactment  of  the  law  made  it  easier  for  the 
individual  to  protect  himself. 

In  1894  and  1897  tne  specific  fee  charged  the  manu- 
facturers was  modified  to  a  fee  which  bore  some  relation  to 
the  quantity  produced.  In  1896  the  commissioner  of  agri- 
culture was  authorized  to  seize  all  fertilizers  sold  in  viola- 
tion of  the  law;  and  should  the  court  having  jurisdiction 
sustain  him,  they  could  be  sold  and  the  proceeds  used  by  the 
department  of  agriculture.  The  intention  of  the  legislators 
was  good;  but  since  they  neither  provided  funds  nor 
authority  to  appoint  field  inspectors  they  accomplished  little. 

The  new  century  brought  a  decided  forward  step  in  the 
adminstration  of  fertilizer  inspection.  The  law1  passed  in 
1900  provided  for  a  field  inspector  to  be  appointed  by  the 
board  of  agriculture  for  each  of  the  ten  congressional 
districts,  with  a  salary  of  $75  per  month  and  expenses  while 
engaged  in  the  spring  and  fall.  These  inspectors  draw 
samples  of  fertilizers  offered  for  sale,  and  also  draw 
samples  for  farmers,  when  requested.  Of  the  471  samples 
drawn  by  the  inspectors  the  first  year  200  fell  below  the 
manufacturers'  guarantee.  The  law  of  1890  allowing 
farmers  to  send  samples  to  the  state  chemist  at  the  time  of 
purchase  remains  in  force,  and  if  the  seller  is  not  present, 
any  justice  of  the  peace  or  any  notary  public,  upon  the 
payment  of  25  cents  by  the  purchaser,  may  witness  that  a 
correct  sample  is  sent.  The  manufacturers'  inspection  and 
license  fee  was  changed  to  15  cents  a  ton.  The  registration 
fee  was  dropped,  as  samples  were  no  longer  analyzed  when 
the  name  of  the  brand  was  registered.  This  ton  tax  of  15 
cents  is  administered  by  means  of  tags  sold  by  the  depart- 
ment of  agriculture,  one  tag  being  placed  on  each  bag  of 

1  Acts,  1899-1900,  c.  10. 


Agriculture.  133 

fertilizer.  In  1910  this  tax  was  supplemented  by  a  registra- 
tion fee  of  $5  for  each  brand  sold  in  the  State.  This  is 
simply  a  revenue  measure  advocated  by  the  department, 
since  it  is  largely  dependent  upon  the  fertilizer  tax.  From 
September  i,  1910,  to  August  31,  1911,  these  five  dollar  fees 
yielded  $10,675  revenue. 

It  was  enacted  in  igoS1  that  these  tags  should  be  a  dif- 
ferent color  each  year,  to  facilitate  inspection ;  and  that  com- 
mon carriers  transporting  untagged  fertilizer  should  be  fined 
from  $25  to  $200  for  each  offense.  The  act  provides  also 
that  no  fertilizer  may  be  offered  which  contains  less  than  1 1 
per  cent,  of  plant  food.  If  it  falls  between  5  and  10  per 
cent,  below  that  guaranteed  to  the  commissioner  of  agricul- 
ture or  marked  on  the  bag  (for  the  department  no  longer 
analyzes  the  manufacturers'  samples),  it  is  the  duty  of  the 
commissioner  of  agriculture  to  assess  twice  the  value  of  such 
deficiency  against  the  manufacturer  of  or  dealer  in  the 
fertilizer  contained  in  the  lot  or  car  from  which  the  sample 
is  drawn;  if  it  is  10  per  cent,  below  he  must  assess  five 
times  the  value  of  the  deficiency.  The  commissioner  of 
agriculture  must  require  the  manufacturer,  dealer,  or  agent 
to  make  good  such  assessments  to  all  persons  who  purchase 
such  fertilizers  from  the  carload  from  which  the  sample  is 
drawn.  This  provision  protects  the  farmer  from  buying  a 
low-grade  article  under  a  high-sounding  name,  like  "  Mam- 
moth Grower."  Farmers  themselves  send  very  few  samples ; 
and  it  was  soon  found  that  it  was  impracticable  to  learn  the 
names  of  all  the  purchasers  from  a  carload  which  had  been 
found  deficient  by  samples  sent  in  to  the  department  by 
inspectors. 

In  1910,  therefore,  the  department  had  a  bill  introduced 
into  the  General  Assembly  allowing  the  department  to  col- 
lect the  penalty  when  the  purchaser  could  not  be  located. 
This  measure  passed  the  House,  but  during  the  last  few 
days  of  the  session  was  killed  in  the  Senate  by  three 
senators,  the  rule  being  that  no  measure  might  come  to  a 

'Acts,  1908,  c.  72. 


134  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

vote  if  opposed  by  three  members.  Hence  the  enforcement 
of  this  law  is  impossible,  and  today  the  department  has  many 
claims  which  cannot  be  collected  because  the  purchasers 
cannot  be  found. 

Since  this  fertilizer  law  is  being  enforced  by  officers  of 
the  State,  the  whole  amount  of  money  paid  as  penalty  should 
come  to  the  department  of  agriculture  or  the  State.  The 
only  justification  for  giving  the  penalty  money  to  the  in- 
dividual purchasers  of  inferior  fertilizer  is  to  induce  the 
purchasers  to  help  enforce  the  law.  They  have  not  done 
this,  and  therefore  the  total  receipts  for  penalty  fines  should 
be  used  for  the  improved  state  enforcement  of  the  inspection 
law.  If  in  1910  a  few  among  the  purchasers  of  approxi- 
mately $7,000,000  worth  of  fertilizers  were  defrauded,  how 
many  must  have  been  defrauded  several  decades  ago  when 
a  purchaser's  only  method  of  judging  a  fertilizer  was  by  its 
smell ;  when  a  polecat  dragged  through  a  carload  added  more 
to  its  marketable  value  than  a  ton  of  potash. 

The  most  effective  weapon  in  the  hands  of  the  depart- 
ment is  publicity.  The  persons  on  a  large  mailing  list  are 
supplied  with  a  monthly  bulletin  containing  the  claimed  and 
the  actual  analyses  of  all  fertilizers  analyzed  during  the 
month.  When  a  bad  sample  is  found,  a  manufacturer  will 
beg  with  excuses  that  it  be  kept  off  this  list,  but  without 
avail. 

In  1910  agricultural  lime  was  brought  under  inspection. 
The  manufacturer  or,  if  the  manufacturer  has  not  paid,  the 
dealer  must  pay  to  the  commissioner  of  agriculture  a  registra- 
tion fee  of  $10  annually  for  each  brand  sold  in  the  State.  It 
is  inspected  by  fertilizer  inspectors,  and  purchasers  and 
sellers  may  jointly  send  in  samples;  but  the  only  penalty  if 
the  lime  falls  more  than  10  per  cent,  below  the  standard 
guaranteed  to  the  commissioner  of  agriculture  is  that  the 
latter  officer  must  prohibit  the  sale  of  the  lot  of  lime  in  the 
State. 

Inspection  of  Trees. — The  first  state  law  dealing  specifi- 
cally with  the  inspection  of  trees  was  passed  in  I89O.1  In 

1  Acts,  1889-90,  c.  189. 


Agriculture.  135 

any  county  where  fruit  trees  were  affected  by  the  "  yellows  " 
it  was  the  duty  of  the  county  judge,  upon  the  request  of 
ten  reputable  freeholders,  to  appoint  one  or  more  orchard 
inspectors  for  one  season;  but  the  appointment  had  to  be 
approved  by  the  board  of  county  supervisors.  The  inspector 
was  paid  by  the  county  $1.50  for  each  day  engaged,  pro- 
vided the  maximum  cost  to  the  county  did  not  exceed  $30 
per  annum.  The  commissioner  of  agriculture,  as  "  chief  in- 
spector of  orchards,"  furnished  the  inspectors  with  suitable 
blanks  for  reports.  Trees  diseased  beyond  remedy  were 
destroyed  at  the  expense  of  the  owner. 

In  1896  the  board  of  control  of  the  state  agricultural  ex- 
periment station  at  Blacksburg  was  authorized  to  designate 
a  scientific  member  of  the  experiment  station  staff  to  act  as 
state  inspector,1  but  no  appropriation  was  made.  In  1898 
an  appropriation  of  $1000  was  made  by  the  State,  and  an 
inspector  was  sent  out  to  cooperate  with  locally  appointed 
inspectors.  The  counties  were  no  longer  restricted  as  to 
the  amount  they  might  appropriate.2 

By  an  act  of  1900  this  same  board  of  control  of  the  agri- 
cultural experiment  station  also  became  known  as  the  "  State 
Board  of  Crop  Pest  Commissioners."  It  was  directed  to 
appoint  a  state  entomologist  and  pathologist  who  should 
succeed  to  the  duties  of  the  inspector  as  described  in  the 
last  paragraph.  In  addition  to  supervising  the  inspection  of 
trees,  he  was  to  prepare  a  list  of  insect  pests  that  might  be 
eradicated,  with  descriptions  of  them  and  the  means  of 
eradication.  This  board  was  given  authority  to  provide 
rules  and  regulations  under  which  the  state  entomologist 
and  pathologist  should  proceed  to  control,  eradicate,  destroy, 
and  prevent  the  dissemination  of  crop  pests,  and  these  rules 
and  regulations  were  to  have  the  effect  of  law  in  so  far  as 
they  conformed  to  the  act  and  to  the  general  laws  of  the 
State  and  of  the  United  States.  The  entomologist  had  to 
provide  for  an  annual  inspection  of  nurseries  and  for  a 

1  Acts,  1895-96,  c.  829. 
*  Acts,  1897-98,  c.  567. 


136  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

guarantee  of  nursery  stock,  the  railroads  not  being  allowed 
to  deliver  stock  not  properly  tagged. 

For  the  carrying  out  of  the  above  act  an  inadequate  ap- 
propriation was  made,  but  in  1903  an  annual  appropriation 
of  $6000  was  made,  plus  a  fee  of  $20  required  from  every 
nurseryman,  to  be  paid  to  the  state  auditor  of  public  ac- 
counts. This  act  also  provides  that  when  ten  freeholders 
petition  the  entomologist,  he  shall  in  person,  or  by  deputy, 
visit  the  section;  and  if  he  finds  any  crop  pests,  he  shall 
appoint  an  inspector  for  the  locality,  who  must  be  paid 
by  the  county. 

Seed  Inspection. — A  seed  law,  enacted  in  1910,  has  for  its 
object  the  improvement  of  the  quality  of  agricultural  seeds 
and  the  elimination  of  impurities  and  of  weed  seeds.  All 
seeds  in  packages  weighing  more  than  fifty  pounds  must 
be  labeled,  stating  the  quality  of  the  seed.  If  the  seeds 
reach  a  certain  standard  of  purity  and  germination,  they 
must  be  labeled  "  standard  " ;  if  not,  the  kinds  and  the  per- 
centage of  impurities  must  be  stated.  The  commissioner 
of  agriculture  has  appointed  a  seed  analyst,  who  tests 
samples  free  for  farmers  and  at  a  cost  of  fifty  cents  a  sample 
for  dealers.  Samples  of  seeds  are  drawn  all  over  the  State, 
by  the  pure  food  inspectors,  to  test  the  accuracy  of  the  label 
guarantees.  The  analysis  of  these  samples  are  published 
in  the  monthly  fertilizer  bulletins. 

Protection  of  Domestic  Animals. — The  first  paragraph  of 
this  chapter  gives  the  elementary  provisions  of  the  law  of 
1870  for  the  protection  of  cattle.  This  law  remained  prac- 
tically unchanged  until  1896,  when  the  protection  of  cattle 
was  recognized  as  a  central  state  function.  The  Federal 
Government  has  protected  the  State  so  well  by  quarantine 
against  southern  and  western  infected  cattle  that  the  energies 
of  the  State  have  been  directed  almost  exclusively  against 
diseases  among  its  own  cattle.  This  work  has  been  done, 
since  1896,  through  the  state  experiment  station  at  Blacks- 
burg.  The  development  from  1896  to  1908  would  not  be 


Agriculture.  137 


instructive,  hence  we  shall  briefly  describe  the  law  of 
which  superseded  all  previous  laws. 

The  board  of  control  of  the  state  experiment  station  at 
Blacksburg  is  to  act  as  a  state  live  stock  sanitary  board,  and 
its  members  are  empowered  to  "  establish,  maintain  and  en- 
force such  quarantine  lines  and  sanitary  rules  and  regula- 
tions as  they  may  deem  necessary";  to  cooperate  with 
similar  boards  of  other  states  ;  to  employ  a  state  veterinarian 
and  assistants  to  enforce  their  regulations;  and  to  compel 
railroad  corporations  to  disinfect  cattle  cars.  The  expenses 
of  the  enforcement  of  these  provisions  are  paid  out  of  the 
treasury  of  the  State  upon  warrants  drawn  by  the  chair- 
man of  the  above  board. 

A  special  state  quarantine  requires  the  approval  of  the 
governor  of  the  state  ;  but  a  local  quarantine  restricted  to  a 
farm  or  a  county  may  be  declared  by  a  county  board  of 
supervisors  or  by  the  state  veterinarian.  If  the  board  of 
supervisors  of  any  county  feels  that  there  is  occasion  for 
alarm,  the  state  veterinarian  is  to  be  summoned  at  once. 
Any  expenses  resulting  from  the  orders  of  the  state  veteri- 
narian are  borne  by  the  county,  though  the  state  veterinarian 
receives  no  fees  in  addition  to  his  state  salary. 

Immigration.  —  Since  its  creation  the  board  of  agriculture 
has  endeavored  to  advertise  the  resources  of  the  State  for 
the  purpose  of  encouraging  immigration;  but  never  before 
1906  was  money  appropriated  directly  for  the  purpose. 
From  1906  to  1910  inclusive  $5000  annually  has  been  appro- 
priated.2 The  first  two  seasons  George  W.  Koiner,  com- 
missioner of  agriculture  and  immigration,  made  trips  to 
Northern  Europe.  As  Canada  had  more  than  three  hun- 
dred immigration  agents  in  Great  Britain  who  offered  free 
passage  to  Canada  and  160  acres  of  land,  and  as  immigrants 
from  Southern  Europe  were  not  desired,  the  commissioner 
changed  his  policy,  and  is  now  advertising  in  the  north  cen- 
tral and  northwestern  States  of  the  Union.  Advertise- 

1  Acts,  1908,  c.  202. 

'This  appropriation  was  not  made  for  1911  because  of  necessary 
temporary  retrenchment. 


138  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

ments  are  placed  in  farm  journals  during  the  season  when 
farmers  are  snow-bound;  and  upon  inquiry  a  hand-book, 
with  a  map  and  a  description  of  each  county  of  the  State, 
is  sent  with  answers  to  specific  questions.  As  a  result,  the 
department  received  during  this  season  about  fifty  inquiries 
daily,  and  about  two  thousand  farmers  came  to  the  State 
last  year  from  Ohio,  Michigan,  and  other  States  of  the 
Middle  West.  Most  of  these  had  capital  and  experience, 
and  came  because  of  the  climate  and  the  cheap  lands  of  the 
State.  Taxable  values  are  much  enhanced  by  their  coming. 
One  farm  in  King  George  County,  in  1910,  produced  a 
4OO-acre  alfalfa  crop  worth  $85  an  acre  on  land  purchased 
less  than  five  years  before  for  $25  an  acre  by  a  gentleman 
from  California. 

Experimentation. — In  1886  the  following  act  was  passed 
by  the  General  Assembly  of  Virginia  :*  "  Whereas  congress 
proposes  to  make  an  appropriation  for  the  maintenance  of 
agricultural  experiment  stations  at  the  several  agricultural 
and  mechanical  colleges  of  the  United  States,  be  it  enacted 
by  the  general  assembly  of  Virginia,  that  an  agricultural  ex- 
periment station  be  and  is  hereby  established  at  the  Virginia 
Agricultural  and  Mechanical  College  at  Blacksburg,  the 
same  to  be  maintained  by  appropriations  made  by  the  con- 
gress of  the  United  States."  The  station,  which  is  known 
as  the  Virginia  Experiment  Station  or  State  Experiment 
Station,  has  always  been  supported  by  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment, and  is  now  receiving  $30,000  annually.  The  board 
of  visitors  for  this  school  is  also  the  board  of  control  for 
the  state  experiment  station,2  and  in  1888  the  board  was 
authorized  to  establish  branch  stations.3 

Beginning  with  1906*  and  since  that  year,  $5000  has  been 

1  Acts,  1885-86,0.311. 

*  It  must  be  held  in  mind  that  the  board  of  visitors  for  the  Virginia 
Agricultural  and  Mechanical  College,  the  board  of  control  of  the 
State  Experiment  Station,  the  state  live  stock  sanitary  board,  and  the 
state  board  of  crop  pest  commissioners  are  the  same  board,  though 
the  different  phases  of  their  duties  are,  in  practice,  carried  out  by 
committees. 

1  Acts,  1887-88,  c.  284. 

4  Acts,  1906,  c.  226. 


Agriculture.  1 39 

annually  appropriated  by  the  State  of  Virginia  for  the  pur- 
pose of  conducting  experiment  stations  and  publishing  the 
results.1  The  appropriations  are  expended  as  directed  by 
the  executive  committee  of  the  above  board ;  and  experiment 
stations  are  now  conducted  at  Appomatox,  Axton,  Bowling 
Green,  Chatham,  Louisa,  and  Rustsburg.  Independent  of 
these  stations,  the  state  board  of  agriculture  has  established 
three  experiment  stations;  one  at  Saxe,  Charlotte  County, 
in  1901 ;  a  trucking  experiment  station  at  Norfolk,  in  1907 ; 
and  another  station  at  Staunton,  Augusta  County,  in  1910. 
The  station  at  Saxe  has  been  supported  by  the  department 
of  agriculture  from  the  fertilizer  tax  fund;  but  for  1910- 
1911  both  the  station  at  Saxe  and  the  station  at  Staunton  are 
being  supported  and  managed  by  the  state  experiment  sta- 
tion just  as  the  six  stations  mentioned  above  are  managed. 
The  Norfolk  station  is  supported  by  an  appropriation  of 
$5000  from  the  fertilizer  tax  fund  of  the  department  of 
agriculture  and  an  equal  amount  from  the  ordinary  funds 
•of  the  State.  The  superintendent  of  the  Norfolk  station  is 
elected  by  a  board  representing  the  state  department  of 
agriculture,  the  state  experiment  station,  the  Norfolk  Pro- 
duce Exchange,  and  the  United  States  Department  of  Agri- 
culture. Experiments  carried  on  at  this  station  by  the 
United  States  Department  of  Agriculture  are  paid  for  by 
the  Federal  department. 

Teaching  and  Demonstration. — The  Virginia  Agricultural 
and  Polytechnic  Institute,  established  in  1872,  offers  a  four- 
years  course  in  agriculture  and  a  six-weeks  winter  course 
to  farmers.  Beginning  with  1910-1911,  movable  schools  of 
agriculture,  lasting  from  three  to  ten  days,  are  sent  when 
requested  by  as  many  as  fifty  farmers.  The  teachers  are 
furnished  by  the  Agricultural  and  Polytechnic  Institute,  but 
$2500  is  given  by  the  State  for  traveling  expenses.  The 
.State  also  gives  a  like  amount  for  extension  demonstration 
work  by  one  man,  who  instructs  individual  farmers  in  all 

1This  $5000  is  supplemented  by  a  like  amount  from  the  United 
States  Bureau  of  Plant  Industry. 


140  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

parts  of  the  State  who  will  lay  off  an  experimental  plot  and 
follow  the  demonstrator's  directions. 

The  department  of  agriculture  conducts  farmers'  insti- 
tutes. Previous  to  1900  the  department  aimed  to  hold  one 
institute  in  each  congressional  district,  but  seldom  succeeded. 
Between  1900  and  1910  as  many  institutes  were  held  as  the 
limited  revenues  of  the  department  would  permit.  In  1910 
the  commissioner  of  agriculture  appointed  a  director  of 
institutes ;  and  during  the  months  of  February,  March,  and 
April,  1911,  he  held  twenty-one  day  institutes  away  from  the 
railroads  and  fifty-eight  half-day  institutes  from  passenger 
coaches.  Railroad  companies  furnished  the  trains  free ;  and 
the  department  furnished  the  lecturers,  who  are  specialists, 
to  address  the  farmers  that  collected  in  the  coaches.  The 
Norfolk  and  Western  Company,  for  example,  furnished  a 
train  of  seven  first-class  brand-new  coaches  for  two  weeks. 
A  similar  train  will  be  run  in  the  fall.  It  is  estimated  that 
twenty  thousand  farmers  attended  these  spring  institutes. 
The  institute  work  is  supported  by  $10,000  appropriated 
annually :  $5000  from  the  fertilizer  tax  fund,  and  the  same 
amount  from  the  general  state  funds. 

The  department  of  public  instruction  conducts  an  agri- 
cultural and  industrial  department  in  a  high  school  of  each 
congressional  district  at  the  total  cost  of  $30,000,  which  is 
appropriated  by  the  State.  This  department  of  public  in- 
struction also  supervises  boys'  corn  clubs  in  cooperation  with 
the  farm  demonstration  work  of  the  United  States  Depart- 
ment of  Agriculture.  For  this  the  State  appropriates 
$50oo.1 

Pure  Food. — In  1898  an  oleomargarine  law  was  enacted 
imposing  a  fine  not  exceeding  $250  upon  any  factory,  store, 
hotel,  cafe,  or  other  public  eating  place  which  made,  sold, 
or  served  oleomargarine,  or  used  it  in  cooking,  without 

1  One  half  of  the  salary  of  county  demonstrators  is  paid  by  the 
county,  the  other  half  by  a  fund  from  the  General  Education  Board, 
slightly  supplemented  by  the  State.  For  1911  the  forty-odd  thousand 
dollars  from  the  General  Education  Board  was  distributed  condi- 
tionally by  the  United  States  Department  of  Agriculture. 


Agriculture.  141 

posting  a  sign  in  a  conspicuous  place,  printed  in  black  letters 
one  inch  square  on  a  white  background :  "  We  sell  oleo- 
margarine here,"  of  "  We  serve  oleomargarine  here."  No 
special  officer,  however,  was  provided  to  enforce  the  law. 
In  1900  a  pure  food  law,1  fashioned  after  the  Federal  pure 
food  law,  included  the  provision  in  regard  to  oleomargarine ; 
and  the  provisions  of  this  law  were  to  be  enforced  by  the 
commissioner  of  agriculture.  The  commissioner,  however, 
did  not  have  available  funds  from  the  fertilizer  tax,  and  a 
special  appropriation  was  not  made  until  1903,  and  then 
only  $2000  per  annum. 

In  1908  the  office  of  dairy  and  food  commissioner  was 
created.  The  commissioner  is  appointed  by  the  governor 
for  four  years  on  a  salary  of  $2500.  He  is  to  work  with  the 
department  of  agriculture;  and  his  deputy  food  commis- 
sioner and  other  assistants  are  to  be  appointed  jointly  by  the 
commissioner  of  agriculture  and  the  dairy  and  food  com- 
missioner, subject  to  the  confirmation  of  the  board  of  agri- 
culture. This  new  commissioner  enforces  all  pure  food 
laws,  including  the  oleomargarine  law,  dairy  product  laws, 
and  cattle  feed  laws.  The  chemical  work  is  done  in  the 
laboratories  of  the  department  of  agriculture.  The  office 
is  supported  by  an  annual  appropriation  of  $7500,  plus  a 
registration  fee  of  $5  from  the  proprietor  of  every  skim- 
ming station,  creamery,  cheese  factory,  condensed  milk  fac- 
tory, or  milk  depot  where  milk  is  received  from  three  or 
more  persons,  plus  a  tax  of  15  cents  a  ton  on  concentrated 
commercial  feeds  which  are  inspected  and  analyzed  for  con- 
stituents of  food  value.  This  last  tax  is  enforced  by  means 
of  tags  like  the  fertilizer  tags  described  above,  and  it  is  col- 
lected by  this  division  of  the  agricultural  department.  It  is 
claimed  that  these  special  inspection  taxes  are  better  col- 
lected by  the  department  which  profits  by  them  than  if  the 
auditor  should  collect  the  same,  since  the  fertilizer  and  pure 
food  inspectors  in  the  field  can  observe  and  report  viola- 
tions; and  these  officers  are  not  directly  responsible  to  the 
state  auditor. 

1  Acts,  1899-1900,  c.  225. 


142  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

The  pure  food  inspectors  not  only  send  samples  of  foods 
to  the  state  chemist  of  the  agricultural  department  but  in- 
spect the  premises  of  such  places  as  restaurants,  bakeries, 
meat  markets,  and  cold  storage  plants.  An  important  part 
of  their  work  is  the  inspection  of  stock  feeds.  As  some  one 
has  said,  "  They  see  that  no  rice  hulls  and  oat  hulls  come 
into  the  State,  and  that  all  peanut  hulls  go  out."  The  dairy 
inspectors  inspect  the  creameries,  dairies,  stables,  and  cows. 
The  State  appropriates  $5000  annually  to  pay  for  cattle 
condemned  on  account  of  tuberculosis. 

RECAPITULATION  FOR  1910. 

A.  State   Department   of   Agriculture   and   Immigration: 

commissioner  and  board. 

1.  Trucking  Experiment  Station  at  Norfolk. 

$5000  fertilizer  tax  fund. 

2.  District  Experiment  Stations  at  Saxe  and  Staunton. 

Fertilizer  tax  fund. 

3.  Farmers'  Institute. 

$5000  State. 

$5000  fertilizer  tax  fund. 

4.  Fertilizer  Inspection. 

Fees  and  tax  on  fertilizers. 
Much  more  than  self-sustaining. 

5.  Seed  Inspection. 

Fees  and  fertilizer  tax  fund. 

6.  Immigration. 

$5000  State. 

B.  Division  of  Dairy  and   Pure   Food   Inspection:  com- 

missioner. 

1.  Food  Inspection. 

$7500  State. 

Fees  and  tax  on  feed. 

2.  Dairy  Inspection. 

$5000  State  for  condemned  cattle. 
Fees. 


Agriculture.  143 

C.  Agricultural   and   Mechanical    College:   president   and 

board. 

1.  State  Experiment  Station. 

$30,000  United  States. 

2.  District  Experiment  Stations  at  Appomattox,  Ax- 

ton,   Bowling  Green,    Chatham,   Louisa,   and 

Rustsburg. 
$5000  State. 
$5000  United  States. 

3.  College. 

$20,000  United  States  land-script  fund. 
$30,000  United  States. 
$55,000  State. 

4.  Movable  Schools  of  Agriculture. 

$2500  State. 
College. 

5.  Demonstration  Extension  Work. 

$2500  State. 

6.  Live  Stock  Quarantine. 

$3500  State. 

7.  Nursery  and  Orchard  Inspection. 

$6000  State. 
Fees. 

D.  Department  of  Public  Instruction:  superintendent  and 

board. 

1.  Agricultural  Departments  in  High  Schools. 

$30,000  State. 

2.  Agricultural  Experiments  and  Demonstrations. 

$2500  Common  School  Fund. 

3.  Boys'  Corn  Clubs. 

$5000  State. 

'  Suggestions. — This  recapitulation  shows  that  the  agricul- 
tural functions  of  the  State  are  being  administered  by  four 
different  departments,  which  are  under  three  different 
boards ;  and  two  of  the  commissioners  are  elected  inde- 
pendently of  these  boards.  The  commissioner  of  agriculture 


144  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

and  immigration  is  elected  by  the  people,  and  the  commis- 
sioner of  pure  foods  and  dairy  inspection  is  appointed  by  the 
governor;  hence,  since  these  two  are  practically  independent 
of  the  board,  there  are  five  practically  independent  sources 
of  state  agricultural  administration  instead  of  one  secretary 
of  agriculture,  such  as  we  find  at  the  head  of  the  Federal 
agricultural  functions. 

Not  only  is  the  work  of  each  department  largely  inde- 
pendent of  that  of  the  others,  but  several  departments  are 
performing  similar  functions.  For  instance,  three  of  them 
are  carrying  on  the  same  kinds  of  experimental  work ;  three 
are  conducting  teaching  and  demonstration  work ;  and  three 
have  police  functions,  such  as  inspection.  This  very  much 
weakens  a  farmer's  interest  in  the  State's  efforts,  since  the 
average  farmer  is  at  a  loss  to  know  where  he  can  get  desired 
information."  And  no  wonder  he  is  at  a  loss.  If  his  hogs 
get  cholera,  he  should  communicate  with  the  commissioner 
of  agriculture  for  cholera  serum.  If  his  cattle  contract 
tuberculosis,  he  should  communicate  with  the  commissioner 
of  pure  foods  and  dairy  inspection  in  Richmond.  If  his 
horses  are  sick  with  distemper,  the  veterinarian  at  Burkeville 
should  be  consulted.  If  his  trees  have  the  San  Jose  scale,  he 
should  seek  help  from  the  state  entomologist  at  Blacksburg. 
If  his  soil  needs  treatment,  he  does  not  know  where  to  write, 
since  the  state  chemists  and  state  experimenter  are  in  oppo- 
site ends  of  the  State  under  separate  boards. 

The  cause  of  this  condition  lies  partly  in  the  very  recent 
expansion  of  the  State's  interest  in  agricultural  functions. 
The  unsatisfactory  condition,  however,  is  recognized,  and  a 
measure  became  law  in  1910  which  created  a  united  agri- 
cultural board,  composed  of  the  governor,  superintendent 
of  public,  instruction,  commissioner  of  agriculture,  president 
of  the  Agricultural  College  and  Polytechnic  Institute,  one 
member  of  the  board  of  visitors  of  this  school,  director  of 
the  State  Experiment  Station,  supervisor  of  district  experi- 
ment stations,  and  general  director  of  demonstration  work 
of  the  United  States  Department  of  Agriculture.  The  gov- 


Agriculture.  145 

ernor  is  chairman  of  the  board.  Traveling  expenses  and 
hotel  bills  constitute  the  only  compensation  of  its  members. 
The  board  is  directed  to  assign  to  the  respective  departments 
such  functions  as  seem  appropriate  thereto. 

The  above  legislation  is  in  the  right  direction,  but  was 
intended  only  as  a  temporary  expedient.  Its  weakness  con- 
sists in  the  fact  that  it  attempts  to  centralize  the  agricultural 
activities  of  the  State  without  placing  anybody  in  the  center. 
The  governor  is  chairman  of  the  board,  but  however  inter- 
ested the  governor  may  be  in  the  development  of  the  agri- 
cultural activities  of  the  State,  he  has  not  the  time  to  do 
more  than  suggest  and  stimulate.  Moreover,  the  next  gov- 
ernor may  not  be  so  interested  in  this  branch  of  government 
as  is  the  present  incumbent,  Governor  Mann.  The  other 
members  of  the  board  also  will  be  able  to  devote  only  a 
small  part  of  their  time  to  the  work  of  the  board. 

It  seems  to  the  writer  that  a  reorganization  should  take 
place  with  a  commissioner  of  agriculture  and  the  board  of 
agriculture  at  the  head.  This  office  and  board  are  provided 
for  by  the  state  constitution,  hence  the  reorganization  could 
come  about  through  the  General  Assembly.  The  commis- 
sioner of  agriculture  should  have  under  him  three  bureaus 
with  three  heads  appointed  by  him,  with  the  consent  of  the 
board.  He  should  have  full  power  to  dismiss  these  three 
heads,  else  he  could  not  be  held  responsible. 

These  three  bureaus  should  be  experimentation,  teaching,- 
and  police  (inspection),  and  the  head  of  each  bureau  should 
appoint  all  of  his  subordinates.  Then  the  system  would 
appear  as  follows : 

Department  of  Agriculture:  commissioner  and  board  with 

committees. 
A.     Bureau  of  Experimentation :  state  experimenter. 

1.  Central  Experiment  Station. 

2.  District  Experiment  Stations. 

3.  High  School  Experiment  Plots. 

4.  Demonstration  Extension  Work. 

5.  Boys'  Corn  Clubs. 
10 


146  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

B.  Bureau  of  Teaching :  president  of  Agricultural  College. 

1.  College. 

2.  Movable  Schools  of  Agriculture. 

3.  Farmers'  Institutes. 

4.  Agricultural  Departments  of  High  Schools. 

5.  Immigration. 

C.  Bureau  of  Police  (Inspection)  :  state  inspector. 

1.  Fertilizer  Inspection. 

2.  Seed  Inspection. 

3.  Food  and  Feed  Inspection. 

4.  Dairy  Inspection. 

5.  Live  Stock  Inspection. 

6.  Nursery  and  Orchard  Inspection. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

PUBLIC  SERVICE  CORPORATIONS. 

Board  of  Public  Works. — During  the  first  half  of  the 
nineteenth  century  it  was  the  policy  of  Virginia  to  encourage 
internal  developments  by  state  aid;  from  the  Civil  War 
until  the  end  of  the  century  liberal  charters  induced  northern 
capital  to  carry  out  private  enterprises ;  but  during  the  first 
decade  of  the  present  century,  control  of  corporations  has 
been  the  problem. 

Previous  to  1816  the  State  had  purchased  bank  stocks, 
canal  stocks,  and  pike  stocks  to  encourage  internal  develop- 
ment. Further,  to  encourage  internal  improvements,  the 
General  Assembly  of  the  above  year  appropriated  these 
stocks,  the  dividends  from  the  same,  and  all  bank  charter 
fees  for  fifty  years  to  serve  as  a  "  Fund  for  Internal  Im- 
provements." To  administer  this  fund,  a  "  Board  of  Pub- 
lic Works  "  was  created,  a  corporate  body  composed  of  the 
governor,  treasurer,  attorney-general,  and  ten  citizens  elected 
by  the  General  Assembly.  Five  of  the  ten  citizen  members 
were  required  to  live  west  of  the  Blue  Ridge  Mountains. 

This  board  met  annually,  and  subscribed  to  the  stock  of 
improvement  companies  when  so  directed  by  the  acts  of  the 
General  Assembly;  but  it  was  allowed  to  subscribe  only 
when  three  fifths  of  the  stock  was  subscribed  by  private 
parties  and  when  one  fifth  was  actually  paid.1  Evidently 
the  board  was  imposed  upon,  because  a  few  years  later  an 
act  required  it  to  examine  carefully  the  financial  character 
of  subscribers  of  the  required  three  fifths  of  the  stock. 
Another  duty  was  to  appoint  commonwealth  directors  in 
the  various  corporations  to  which  the  State  had  subscribed. 

In  1831,  as  a  result  of  the  new  constitution  of  1830,  the 
board  was  reorganized.  The  governor,  lieutenant-governor, 

1  Acts,  1815-16,  c.  17. 


148  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

treasurer,  second  auditor,  and  surveyor  of  public  works 
composed  this  board.1  Two  years  later  the  personnel  of  the 
board  was  again  changed  to  the  governor,  treasurer,  first 
auditor,  and  second  auditor.2  In  1837  an  extensive  act  pro- 
viding for  the  chartering  and  control  of  railroads  gave 
additional  duties  to  this  board.  The  railroads  had  to  report 
their  gross  and  net  receipts  to  it  every  three  years.  As  soon 
as  the  original  cost  of  the  road,  with  6  per  cent,  interest, 
should  be  returned  to  the  stockholders,  the  board  was  to 
prescribe  such  rates  as  would  leave  6  per  cent,  dividends  for 
the  stockholders.3  The  last  provision  would  not  be  likely 
to  burden  any  board  with  rate  making ;  nor  did  it. 

Previous  to  this  the  state  aid  to  banks,  canals,  and  mac- 
adamized and  plank  roads  had  not  brought  a  heavy  debt 
upon  the  State ;  but  railroad  building  proved  more  expensive. 
In  1838  the  board  was  directed  to  borrow  "  in  America  or 
Europe"  when  authorized  by  law;  and  by  1861  nearly  one 
hundred  acts  had  authorized  them  to  invest  or  to  guarantee 
to  those  who  would  invest,  thereby  making  the  state  debt 
about  $33,000,000,  representing  appropriations  in  excess  of 
state  revenues.  This  encouraging  of  railroads  added  greatly 
to  the  duties  of  the  board.  For  example,  in  1849  it  was 
authorized  to  build  a  railroad  from  near  Charlottesville  to 
Waynesboro,  by  tunneling  through  the  Blue  Ridge  Moun- 
tains. Two  years  later  a  permanent  secretary  was  attached 
to  the  board. 

The  constitution  of  1851  again  changed  the  personnel. 
From  this  date  until  the  end  of  the  Civil  War  the  board  con- 
sisted of  three  commissioners  elected  by  the  people  of  the 
three  districts  into  which  the  State  was  divided  for  this 
purpose.  They  met  monthly,  and  retained  a  permanent  sec- 
retary. During  the  Civil  War  we  find  them  compelling  the 
railroads  to  haul  fuel-wood  into  Richmond  at  a  reduced  rate. 

This  board,  ever-changing  in  personnel,  assumed  its  last 
form  by  the  "Reconstruction  Constitution."  From  1870 


1  Acts,  18.31,  c.  112. 
*  Acts,  1833,  c.  112. 
•Acts,  1836-37,  c.  118. 


Public  Service  Corporations.  149 

until  1902  the  board  consisted  of  the  governor,  auditor,  and 
treasurer.  During  this  period  the  duties  of  the  board,  as 
from  time  to  time  prescribed  by  the  General  Assembly,  were 
varied.  For  example,  in  1871  they  were  authorized  to 
exchange  stocks  and  bonds  held  by  the  State  in  internal 
improvement  companies  for  state  bonds,  both  to  exchange 
at  par;  or  else  to  sell  the  stocks  to  the  highest  bidder,  pro- 
vided the  price  was  not  below  par  value.1  In  1874  they  were 
ordered  by  the  General  Assembly  to  furnish  a  plan  for  fish 
ladders,  which  all  owners  of  dams  were  compelled  to  install. 
Ten  years  later  they  were  directed  to  select  a  plan  for  a 
new  hospital  for  the  insane.  The  same  year  it  was  made 
their  duty  to  appoint  directors  of  the  three  hospitals  for  the 
insane,  also  visitors  for  the  Deaf,  Dumb  and  Blind  Institute 
and  the  Virginia  Military  Institute.  Though  the  board 
existed  until  1902,  it  was  robbed  of  most  of  its  duties  in 
1877,  when  the  General  Assembly  provided  for  a  railroad 
commissioner. 

Railroad  Commissioner. — The  office  of  railroad  commis- 
sioner was  created  in  1877  because  the  roads  were  charging 
rates  which  were  considered  unreasonable  and  discrimi- 
natory as  to  Virginia  cities.  The  commissioner  was  elected 
by  the  General  Assembly  for  a  period  of  two  years,  and 
was  allowed  to  appoint  his  own  clerk.  He  had  general 
supervision  over  steam  railroads  only.  If  he  wished  to  have 
a  road  enjoined  for  the  violation  of  its  charter  or  of  other 
law,  he  had  first  to  get  the  consent  of  the  board  of  public 
works.  He  could  order  repairs  to  a  road,  better  station 
facilities,  reduced  fares  for  passengers,  or  reduced  rates 
for  freight;  but  if  his  orders  were  not  complied  within 
sixty  days,  he  had  to  consult  the  board  of  public  works, 
who  could  act  "  as  they  deemed  expedient."2 

In  1878  the  General  Assembly  directed  the  commissioner 
to  contract  with  the  railroads  for  the  transportation  of  con- 
victs and  insane,  provided  the  rate  should  not  exceed  two 

1  Acts,  1870-71,  c.  210. 
*Acts,  1876-77,  c.  254. 


150  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

cents  a  mile  by  the  shortest  route,  which  route  must  be 
followed.  The  following  year  an  act  directed  him  to  post 
in  railway  stations  all  laws  and  rules  regulating  railroads. 

In  the  governor's  message  of  1891-1892  complaints  of 
discriminations  in  rates  and  schedules  to  the  injury  of  cer- 
tain cities  were  voiced.  Hence,  an  act  was  passed  prohibit- 
ing a  greater  charge  for  a  short  haul  than  for  a  long,  but 
providing  that  the  commissioner  might  make  exceptions  to 
this  rule.  Each  railroad  had  to  file  a  schedule  of  rates  and 
fares  with  him ;  and  from  time  to  time  the  General  Assembly 
called  upon  him  for  statistics  concerning  railroads.  With 
the  control  of  the  board  of  public  works  on  one  side  and 
continual  special  legislation  on  the  other,  the  commissioner 
could  not  develop  strength.  In  fact,  the  powers  of  both  the 
board  of  public  works  and  the  railroad  commissioner  weak- 
ened while  the  volumes  of  acts  of  the  General  Assembly 
were  swelling  with  special  legislation.1 

Organization  of  the  State  Corporation  Commission. — In 
the  new  constitution  of  1902  one  third  of  the  long  document 
is  devoted  to  a  detailed  provision  for  a  unique  commission 
to  be  known  as  the  "  State  Corporation  Commission."2  It 
was  deemed  best  to  make  the  detailed  provisions  of  it  funda- 
mental rather  than  statute  law  for  various  reasons ;  first,  the 
average  caliber  of  the  members  of  the  convention  excelled 
that  of  the  General  Assembly.3  Again,  a  commission  with 
such  strong  powers  needed  the  prestige  of  a  body  especially 
entrusted  with  the  sovereign  powers  of  the  people.  Further, 
the  General  Assembly  would  probably  have  limited  the 

1  The  governor  in  his  message  of  1891-92  deplored  the  bulk  of 
private  legislation.  Of  the  1293  pages  of  acts  for  the  preceding  ses- 
sion 1043  were  devoted  to  private  legislation.  But  no  reform  came 
until  the  Constitutional  Convention  of  1902,  when  such  administration 
functions  as  the  issuance  of  charters,  control  of  rates,  and  granting 
of  pensions  were  transferred  to  boards  and  commissions.  General 
rules  were,  of  course,  reserved  for  the  General  Assembly.  As  a 
result  of  this  reform  more  legislation  is  found  in  the  67o-page  volume 
of  acts  for  1910  than  in  the  isoo-page  volume  for  1900. 

'Constitution,  1902,  Art.  XII. 

3  On  the  committee  which  drafted  the  law  were  such  constitutional 
lawyers  as  Senator  John  W.  Daniel  and  Hon.  A.  Caperton  Braxton, 
to  the  latter  of  whom  is  to  be  ascribed  the  idea  of  such  a  commission. 


Public  Service  Corporations.  151 

appropriations  for  the  support  of  the  commission  to  the 
extent  of  robbing  it  of  its  dignity  and  power;  and,  instead 
of  having  the  commissioners  appointed  for  long  terms  by 
the  governor,  would  have  provided  for  short-term  commis- 
sioners elected  by  the  General  Assembly  itself.1  And  when 
it  came  to  bestowing  legislative,  judicial,  and  executive 
powers  upon  one  body,  the  assemblymen's  preconceived 
reverence  for  the  Montesquieu-Jeffersonian  division  of 
powers  would  have  been  an  unsurmountable  barrier. 

The  commission  is  composed  of  three  members,  one  being 
appointed  by  the  governor  every  alternate  February  for  a 
term  of  six  years,  at  a  salary  of  $4000  per  annum,  with  $500 
extra  for  the  chairman.  One  of  the  three  must  have  the 
qualifications  prescribed  for  members  of  the  supreme  court 
of  appeals ;  and  each  must  take  oath  that  he  has  no  financial 
interest  in  any  transportation  or  transmission  company. 
Free  railway  transportation  is  accorded  the  commissioners 
when  on  official  business  within  the  State.  The  expenses 
of  the  commission  are  paid  from  the  state  treasury,  but  an 
annual  registration  fee  for  corporations,  ranging  from  $5 
to  $25  according  to  the  amount  of  capital  stock,  was  im- 
posed to  cover  this  new  item  of  expense.  These  fees  have 
become  more  than  sufficient. 

Its  functions  are  legislative,  judicial,  and  executive.  It 
creates,  regulates,  and  supervises  all  domestic  corporations, 
except  municipal  corporations  and  institutions  owned  by  the 
State;  and  it  regulates  and  supervises  all  foreign  corpora- 
tions permitted  to  do  business  in  the  State.  The  legislative 
functions  of  the  commission  are  to  prescribe  rates  and 
classifications  for  transportation  companies;  to  prescribe 
rates  for  transmission  companies;  and  to  prescribe  other 
regulations,  such  as  demurrage  charges. 

The  commission  is  a  court  of  record,  with  a  clerk,  bailiff, 
and  other  necessary  court  subordinates;  it  may  compel  the 
attendance  of  witnesses  or  the  production  of  papers ;  it  may 


1  The  General  Assembly  in  1908  came  within  two  votes  of  agreeing 
to  submit  to  the  people  the  question  of  popular  election  of  the  cor- 
poration commissioners. 


152  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

fine  or  imprison  for  contempt;  and  its  members  may  be 
impeached.  In  fact  it  has  every  essential  of  a  court,  and  is 
a  court.  From  time  to  time  the  General  Assembly  refers 
to  this  court  matters  which  that  body  had  formerly  decided. 
For  example,  in  1910  the  General  Assembly  was  asked  for 
permission  to  place  additional  toll-gates  on  the  Valley  Pike, 
that  the  toll  might  be  more  fairly  distributed.  The  matter 
was  referred  to  the  corporation  commission. 

There  is,  of  right,  an  appeal  from  the  commission  to  the 
supreme  court  of  appeals  in  the  same  manner  that  appeals 
may  be  taken  from  other  courts,  but  they  must  usually  be 
taken  within  six  months,  always  within  twelve.  Writs  of 
mandamus  and  prohibition  lie  from  the  court  of  appeals. 
When  an  appeal  is  taken  to  the  court  of  appeals  from  a 
decision  prescribing  rates,  charges,  or  classification,  the 
transportation  or  transmission  company  either  puts  such 
rates  or  charges  into  effect  pending  the  appeal,  or  else  files 
with  the  commission  a  bond  sufficient  to  guarantee  the 
refunding  of  all  overcharges  in  case  the  commission  is 
sustained.  When  the  supreme  court  of  appeals  declares 
void  a  rate  determined  by  the  commission,  it  must  prescribe 
a  substitute  therefor,  which  has  the  same  effect  as  if  pre- 
scribed by  the  commission. 

The  corporation  commission  was  created  with  the  hope 
of  avoiding  tedious  litigation  with  the  carriers  and  years  of 
delay.  It  was  thought  that  inquiry  might  be  made  into  the 
rates  by  judicial  investigation  before  the  rate  has  been  pre- 
scribed, and  that  this  judicial  inquiry,  which  is  conceded 
to  be  necessary  to  avoid  the  constitutional  guarantee  against 
confiscation,  would  assure  due  process  of  law  to  the  carriers. 
It  was  believed  that  the  rates  so  prescribed  would  not  be 
attacked  by  any  other  body,  except  that  the  Supreme  Court 
of  the  United  States,  on  writ  of  error,  could  review  the 
decision  of  the  supreme  court  of  appeals.1 

Though  the  commission  is  endowed  with  these  important 
legislative  and  judicial  functions,  it  is  also  an  administrative 

1  Proceedings  State  Bar  Association,  1909,  pp.  205,  255. 


Public  Service  Corporations.  153 

body.  It  issues  all  charters,  amendments,  or  extensions 
thereof  for  domestic  corporations,  and  issues  licenses  to 
foreign  corporations ;  and  it  regulates  the  issue  of  corpora- 
tion stocks  and  bonds.  The  constitution  provides  that  the 
General  Assembly  shall  neither  grant,  amend,  nor  extend 
any  charter  by  special  acts,  but  it  may  repeal  any  charter  at 
any  time.  Neither  may  the  General  Assembly,  by  special 
act,  regulate  the  affairs  of  any  corporation,  nor  give  it  any 
rights,  powers,  or  privileges.  From  time  to  time  the  com- 
mission examines  whether  the  charter  rights  are  being  ex- 
ceeded or  abused  by  transportation  or  transmission  com- 
panies; and  it  possesses  full  rights  to  examine  the  books 
and  papers  of  these  corporations  and  to  prescribe  uniform 
methods  of  bookkeeping.  It  assesses  the  real  and  personal 
property  of  all  public  service  corporations  for  state,  county, 
and  district  taxes.  It  also  levies  the  fees,  the  franchise, 
and  the  license  taxes  of  this  class  of  corporations.  The 
assessment  of  mineral  lands  biennially  is  also  supervised 
by  this  body.  It  may  order  an  improvement  in  the  physical 
condition  of  a  road,  in  rolling  stock  or  stations;  and  it 
may  require  proper  connections  at  junctions,  or  even  addi- 
tional trains  and  employees  if  the  traffic  is  not  being 
promptly  handled.  All  of  the  functions  that  the  board  of 
public  works  and  the  railroad  commissioner  performed  be- 
fore 1902  are  now  performed  by  the  corporation  com- 
mission. 

Working  of  the  State  Corporation  Commission. — The 
corporation  commission  was  formally  organized  May  2, 
1903.  Its  first  important  legislative  order  was  issued,  after 
giving  the  railroad  companies  an  ample  hearing,  on  the  I3th 
of  August,  announcing  a  schedule  of  rules  regulating  de- 
murrage, car  service,  and  storage  charges.  An  appeal  was 
taken  to  the  court  of  appeals,  denying  both  the  jurisdic- 
tion of  the  commission  and  the  fairness  of  the  rates.  The 
commission  was  upheld  on  both  points,  with  a  few  minor 
exceptions. 

In  1905  an  investigation  of  freight  rates  was  entered  upon ; 


154  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

and  on  October  15,  1907,  a  single  uniform  freight  classi- 
fication went  into  effect.  On  December  18,  1906,  telegraph 
rates  were  prescribed,  and  were  put  into  effect  on  the  ap- 
pointed day.  The  following  year  when  the  telegraph 
operators  were  on  a  strike  the  Bell  Telephone  Company 
doubled  its  night  rates.  It  was  summoned  before  the  com- 
mission and  ordered  to  continue  the  old  rates  until  permis- 
sion was  granted  for  the  change,  should  a  change  be  allowed. 
Upon  a  hearing  the  proposed  increase  was  permitted. 

In  1906  the  General  Assembly  passed  a  resolution  direct- 
ing the  corporation  commission  to  prescribe  a  two-cent 
maximum  passenger  rate.  This  resolution  was  not  binding 
upon  the  commission,  since  the  assembly  is  constitutionally 
prohibited  from  regulating  rates.  However,  the  commis- 
sion on  July  31,  1906,  caused  a  notice  to  be  served  on  the 
steam  railroads  doing  business  in  the  State,  declaring  that 
the  commission  would,  on  November  i,  1906,  hear  and  con- 
sider objections  which  might  be  urged  against  the  fixing  and 
prescribing  of  a  two-cent  rate  for  the  transportation  of 
passengers  between  points  in  the  State.  The  railroad  com- 
panies appeared  and  filed  their  objections.  Between  this 
date  and  April  27,  1907,  the  companies  were  given  public 
hearings  which  covered  several  months,  and  no  company 
was  denied  the  privilege  of  introducing  any  evidence  offered. 
On  this  last-named  date  the  commission  ordered  the  two- 
cent  fare  to  go  into  effect  July  I,  1907,  on  the  ten  strongest 
roads  of  the  State ;  two  and  one  half  cents  on  three  branch 
roads ;  three  cents  on  twelve  roads,  and  three  and  one  half 
cents  on  twelve  roads  whose  passenger  traffic  was  especially 
light.1 

Instead  of  appealing  to  the  court  of  appeals,  a  privilege 
which  is  allowed  of  right  by  the  constitution  of  the  State, 
six  of  the  roads,  on  May  15,  1907,  brought  suit  in  the 
United  States  circuit  court  to  enjoin  the  commission  from 
enforcing  the  order  of  April  27.  The  suit  was  based  on  the 
following  claims: 

1  Fifth  Report  of  the  State  Corporation  Commission,  pp.  71-112. 


Public  Service  Corporations.  155 

1.  That  the  corporation  commission  had  erred  in  holding 

the  rate  in  question  to  be  not  less  than  reasonable; 

2.  That  the  proceedings  of  the  commission  in  which  this 

decision  was  reached  did  not  amount  to  due  process  of 
the  law ; 

3.  That  to  require  the  judicial -question  of  the  reasonable- 

ness of  a  rate  to  be  passed  upon  by  a  special  court, 
organized  differently  from  the  ordinary  courts,  would 
deprive  the  companies  affected  of  the  equal  protection 
of  the  laws; 

4.  That  the  commission  could  not  act  judicially  because  it 

is  clothed  also  with  legislative  and  executive  powers; 

5.  That  the  State  had  bound  itself  not  to  regulate  rates 

except  under  circumstances  which  do  not  exist,  and 
therefore  the  act  of  the  commission  impaired  the  obliga- 
tion of  the  contract  between  the  State  and  the  com- 
pany; and, 

6.  That,  inasmuch  as  interstate  rates  are  built  upon  intra- 

state  rates,  any  regulation  of  the  latter  by  the  State  is 
a  regulation  of  interstate  commerce,  and  is  void. 

The  court  issued  a  preliminary  injunction  restraining  the 
members'  of  the  commission  and  the  clerk  from  further 
proceedings  in  the  matter.  On  June  27,  1907,  the  de- 
fendants (members  of  the  commission)  filed  an  answer 
denying  the  jurisdiction  of  the  court  on  the  grounds  that  it 
was  in  "  substance  and  effect "  a  suit  against  the  State  of 
Virginia,  and  was  in  violation  of  the  Eleventh  Amendment 
of  the  Federal  Constitution;  and  further  that  the  commis- 
sion is  a  judicial  court  of  record  of  the  State,  and  could  not 
be  enjoined  by  a  Federal  court.  These  objections  of  the 
defendants  were  overruled,  and  an  interlocutory  injunction 
was  issued. 

At  this  stage  an  amicable  compact  was  made  for  the 
purpose  of  expediting  the  litigation  and  obtaining  an  early 
decision  from  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States.1 

1  A  settled  policy  of  the  commission  is  to  adjust  all  complaints  by 
mediation  if  possible. 


156  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

The  members  of  the  commission  agreed  not  to  defend  the 
suit  on  the  merits  of  the  rate  set,  but  to  allow  the  injunction 
to  become  permanent,  that  an  appeal  might  be  taken  at  once 
from  the  decision  of  the  circuit  court  to  the  United  States 
Supreme  Court.  The  six  railroads  agreed  that,  notwith- 
standing the  injunction,  they  would  put  in  force  the  re- 
duced rates  prescribed  by  the  commission  until  the  decision 
of  the  United  States  Supreme  Court  should  decide  first, 
whether  the  State  of  Virginia  had  violated  the  Constitu- 
tion of  the  United  States  or  the  Bill  of  Rights  of  Virginia 
by  combining  legislative,  judicial,  and  executive  functions  in 
a  single  body ;  and  second,  whether  the  circuit  court  of  the 
United  States  properly  had  jurisdiction  in  the  case.  Should 
the  constitutionality  of  the  commission  be  upheld  but  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  circuit  court  be  denied,  it  was  agreed  on 
the  part  of  the  commission  that  they  would  grant  another 
hearing  to  the  roads  on  the  merits  of  the  rates,  which  would 
then  have  been  given  a  reasonable  trial. 

The  State  of  Virginia  retained  Senator  John  W.  Daniel 
and  Honorable  A.  Caperton  Braxton  to  assist  Attorney- 
General  Anderson,  and  a  hard  fight  was  made  for  the  very 
existence  of  the  legislative  and  judicial  sides  of  the  com- 
mission. On  November  30,  1908,  the  Supreme  Court  ren- 
dered its  decision.  The  decision  was  that  the  State,  by  its 
constitution,  may  combine  legislative  and  judicial  functions 
in  a  single  body ;  but  that  the  function  of  determining  rates 
is  a  purely  legislative  one.  Therefore,  in  prescribing  rates, 
the  court  performs  a  legislative  act,  and  the  enforcement 
of  the  act  is  strictly  administrative,  and  is  not  immune  from 
a  Federal  injunction.  However,  the  circuit  court  had  com- 
mitted an  error  by  acting  too  soon ;  its  decision  was  reversed, 
and  the  costs  were  placed  upon  the  railroad  companies.  Be- 
cause an  appeal  was  of  right  allowed  to  the  Virginia  court 
of  appeals,  this  appeal  should  have  been  taken.  And  as 
this  court  was  given  power,  by  the  constitution  of  the  State, 
to  revise  the  order  of  the  commission  or  to  prescribe  a  new 
rate,  the  legislative  phase  had  not  yet  been  completed ;  there- 


Public  Service  Corporations.  157 

fore,  the  United  States  circuit  court  should  not  have  en- 
joined until  this  step  had  been  taken.  If  the  railroads,  after 
an  appeal  to  and  decision  from  the  court  of  appeals,  still  felt 
that  the  rate  was  confiscatory,  then  the  court  of  appeals 
might  be  enjoined  if  it  should  attempt  to  enforce  its  judg- 
ment, since  it  too  would  have  performed  not  a  judicial,  but 
first  a  legislative  and  then  an  administrative  function.1 

So  the  railroad  companies,  as  had  been  formerly  agreed, 
again  came  before  the  commission.  The  commission,  after 
a  full  hearing,  ordered  that  the  rate  should  be  two  and  one 
half  cents  instead  of  two  cents  a  mile  for  the  more  important 
roads;  and  the  railroads  put  the  rate  into  effect  at  once. 
One  exception  to  this  was  the  Richmond,  Fredericksburg, 
and  Potomac  Railroad,  which  was  given  the  two-cent 'rate 
from  the  date  of  the  original  order  of  the  commission  until 
1911,  when  it  was  allowed  to  increase  the  rate  to  two  and 
one  half  cents  a  mile  on  the  ground  that  it  was  losing  by  its 
intrastate  passenger  traffic,  though  its  total  traffic  yielded  9 
per  cent,  dividends. 

On  the  judicial  side  the  court  has  maintained  its  prestige. 
It  has  had  to  give  judicial  interpretation  to  many  charters. 
In  fact,  its  control  of  railroads  has  led  it  into  unexpected 
fields.  For  example,  four  towns  in  the  southwestern  part  of 
the  State  passed  ordinances  prohibiting  the  shipment  of 
whiskey  into  the  towns  by  express  companies.  The  express 
companies  obeyed.  The  wholesale  whiskey  dealers  in 
Roanoke  appealed  to  the  commission  to  force  the  express 
companies  to  accept  their  shipments.  The  commission  as- 
sumed jurisdiction,  and  after  a  hearing  decided  that  the  four 
towns  had  exceeded  their  charter  rights,  and  ordered  the 
express  companies  to  haul  whiskey  offered  for  shipment  to 
these  towns,  provided  the  amount  did  not  exceed  one  gallon, 
the  amount  allowed  by  the  state  law. 

On  the  purely  administrative  side  the  commission  has 
fully  justified  its  creation.  As  a  result  of  the  new  taxes 
imposed  by  the  recent  constitution  and  the  efficiency  of  the 

^rentis  v.  Atlantic  Coast  Line  R.  R.  Co.,  211  U.  S.  210. 


158  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

commission,  the  state  revenue  from  railroads  has  increased 
fourfold.  At  the  same  time  the  corporations  seem  satisfied. 
They  would  rather  deal  with  a  judicial  commission  than  with 
a  political  legislature.  Their  taxes  may  be  increased,  but 
their  political  expenses  are  lessened.  They  need  not  interest 
themselves  in  politics,  since  the  General  Assembly  cannot 
grant  any  special  charter  privileges.  The  prescribing  of  a 
two-cent  passenger  rate  was  in  no  sense  demagogic.  Of  the 
three  commissioners  who  prescribed  it  one  was  a  lawyer  of 
high  rank,  one  was  a  public-spirited  millionaire,  and  the 
third,  for  the  welfare  of  the  commission,  paid  the  annual 
salary  of  an  extra  clerk  from  his  own  salary. 

In  several  instances,  however,  individual  members  have 
been  open  to  criticism.  In  1905  it  developed,  as  a  result  of 
discord  between  two  clerks  of  the  commission,  that  a  com- 
missioner owned  a  one-hundred-dollar  share  in  the  Virginia 
Corporation  Company  and  a  clerk  owned  three  one-hundred- 
dollar  shares;  and  that  the  clerk  furnished  daily  to  this 
company  a  list  of  corporations  applying  for  charters.  A 
member  of  the  commission  is  prohibited  from  owning  any 
stock  in  a  transportation  or  transmission  corporation  doing 
business  in  the  State  but  is  not  prohibited  from  holding 
other  stocks,  so  this  act  was  not  illegal;  but  a  legislative 
investigation  was  made. 

The  Virginia  Corporation  Company  was  a  Richmond  com- 
pany composed  of  a  few  parties  who  held  in  all  twenty 
one-hundred-dollar  shares  of  stock.  The  purpose  of  the 
company  was  to  draw  up  charters  where  they  were  needed, 
and  have  the  same  granted  by  the  corporation  commission. 
The  commissioner  stated  in  his  defence  that  the  pressure 
of  business  upon  the  commission  had  made  it  advisable  that 
such  a  company  be  created,  which  could  assist  the  commis- 
sion by  presenting  requests  for  charters  in  proper  form,  and 
he  had  taken  one  share  of  stock  merely  to  assist  in  the 
creation  of  such  a  company.  No  unusual  profit  had  been 
obtained,  and  the  past  record  of  the  commissioner  had  been 
of  the  best.  The  majority  report  recommended  that  the 


Public  Service  Corporations.  159 

commissioner  be  asked  to  resign,  though  his  act  was  without 
corrupt  motive.  The  two  houses  of  the  General  Assembly, 
however,  by  a  large  majority  accepted  the  minority  report 
which  found  him  guilty  of  "a  grave  error  of  judgment  and 
indiscretion,"  but  did  not  ask  him  to  resign. 

Two  years  later  the  confirmation  of  the  governor's  ap- 
pointee, Commissioner  Rhea,  was  "  held  up  "  in  the  General 
Assembly  by  Republican  members  from  the  appointee's  con- 
gressional district.  A  joint  committee  was  appointed  to 
investigate.  The  majority  reported  to  exonerate  him,  but 
the  investigation  developed  the  fact  that  corrupt  practices 
by  his  retainers  had  been  perpetrated  when  the  appointee 
was  a  candidate  for  Congress.  The  governor  was  censured 
by  the  press  and  the  public  for  making  the  injudicious  ap- 
pointment of  one  who  had  played  politics  in  the  most  hotly 
contested  section  of  the  State.  While  the  investigation  was 
being  made,  a  bill  to  submit  the  question  of  popular  election 
of  the  commissioners  to  the  people  passed  the  Senate  with 
only  two  dissenting  votes,  but  in  the  house  it  was  defeated 
by  a  majority  of  two.  Popular  election  of  judges  is  most 
strongly  condemned  by  students  of  government;  therefore 
future  governors  should  carefully  avoid  even  the  appearance 
of  evil.  The  opportunity  for  graft  is  enormous  in  this  com- 
mission; and  a  lack  of  confidence  should  be  carefully 
guarded  against.  The  dignity  of  the  commission  should  be 
second  only  to  that  of  the  state  court  of  appeals. 

Bureau  of  Insurance. — The  constitution  of  1902  provided 
that  a  bureau  of  insurance,  a  bureau  of  banking,  and  other 
bureaus  might  be  established  within  the  department  of  the 
state  corporation  commission  by  the  General  Assembly.1  In 
1906  a  bureau  of  insurance  was  established  under  the  super- 
vision and  control  of  the  corporation  commission.2  The 
commissioner  of  insurance  is  elected  by  the  General  As- 
sembly for  a  term  of  four  years.  But  when  the  first  com- 
missioner appeared  before  the  corporation  commission  to 


1  Constitution,  1902,  Art.  XII,  Sec.  155. 
*Acts,  1906,0. 112. 


160  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

qualify,  he  was  refused  on  the  ground  that  the  corporation 
commission  itself  was,  according  to  the  constitution,  the 
body  to  select  the  commissioner.  The  Virginia  court  of 
appeals,  however,  decided  against  the  commission,  and  the 
commissioner  of  insurance  was  duly  sworn  in.  He  should 
be  appointed  by  the  commission  since  he  is  subordinate  to  it. 
He  appoints  his  own  deputy  commissioner  and  other  neces- 
sary assistants.  The  expenses  of  the  bureau  are  paid  by  a 
tax  on  the  premiums  paid  the  companies  by  policy  holders 
of  the  State ;  but  this  tax  may  not  exceed  one  tenth  of  one 
per  cent,  of  said  premiums.  The  duties  connected  with  the 
control  of  insurance  companies,  which  had  been  performed 
by  the  auditor  of  public  accounts,  were  turned  over  to  this 
new  bureau. 

All  licenses  to  foreign  insurance,  guaranty,  trust,  indem- 
nity, fidelity,  and  security  companies,  and  certificates  of 
authority  to  domestic  companies,  must  be  granted  by  the 
corporation  commission  through  the  bureau  of  insurance. 
Whenever  it  is  deemed  necessary  for  the  protection  of  policy 
holders,  the  corporation  commission  may  have  the  commis- 
sioner of  insurance  make  an  examination  of  the  condition  of 
any  company  permitted  to  do  insurance  business  in  the 
State;  and  the  company  must  give  the  commissioner  free 
access  to  its  books.  If  he  reports  unfavorably,  the  corpora- 
tion commission  may  withdraw  the  license  of  such  company 
after  giving  it  a  hearing.  In  all  cases,  however,  the  company 
has  an  appeal  to  the  court  of  appeals. 

The  investigation  of  the  cause  of  fires  is  an  important 
function  of  this  bureau.  The  head  of  the  fire  department 
in  each  city  or  town  and  the  sheriff  of  each  county  must 
report  all  fires  to  this  bureau ;  and  for  each  report  a  fee  of 
$i  is  paid.  In  an  investigation  the  commissioner  may  com- 
pel the  attendance  of  witnesses;  and  the  hearings  may  be 
either  public  or  private.  The  commissioner  must  receive  an 
annual  detailed  report  from  each  company,  and  must  submit 
these  reports  to  the  corporation  commission.  Also,  if  com- 
plaint is  made  that  excessive  rates  are  being  charged,  he 


Public  Service  Corporations.  161 

must  investigate,  and  report  the  results  of  such  investiga- 
tions to  the  General  Assembly,  with  recommendations  as  to 
needful  legislation.  Every  company  is  required  to  have 
an  agent  in  Richmond,  upon  whom  may  be  served  all  lawful 
processes ;  and  a  sum  of  not  less  than  $10,000  nor  more  than 
$50,000  in  bonds  must  be  kept  on  deposit  with  the  state 
treasurer. 

Banking  Division. — Previous  to  the  creation  of  the  cor- 
poration commission  the  state  auditor  would  from  time  to 
time  receive  reports  of  banking  institutions,  and  depositories 
for  state  funds  were  examined  periodically  by  legislative 
committees.  These  reports  were  necessarily  of  a  formal 
character.  Since  1907  the  corporation  commission  has  re- 
ceived five  annual  statements  from  the  state  banking  insti- 
tutions at  the  same  time  as  those  made  by  the  national  banks 
to  the  comptroller  of  the  currency  are  received.  The  reports 
from  the  two  institutions  are  similar  in  character.  If  a 
report  indicates  anything  wrong,  an  examination  is  made. 

The  commission  also  examines  all  state  depositories  at 
least  once  a  year.  "A  bit  of  grim  humor,"  somebody 
remarked.  If  the  examination  of  the  banks  containing  funds 
of  the  State  be  deemed  expedient,  why  is  it  not  equally 
expedient  to  examine  other  banks?  Few  individuals  could 
do  it  even  if  permitted.  How  many  individuals  would  know 
the  market  value  of  stocks  if  they  should  see  them  ?  How- 
ever, the  commission  is  required  to  examine  any  bank  upon 
the  request  of  stockholders  owning  one  fifth  of  the  capital 
stock. 

In  1910  the  corporation  commission  was  given  power  to 
appoint  a  bank  examiner,  assistant  examiners,  a  clerk, 
stenographer,  and  necessary  assistants.  Hence,  at  present, 
in  addition  to  the  five  annual  statements,  at  least  one  annual 
inspection  is  made  of  state  banking  institutions  and  of  such 
national  banks  as  are  used  as  state  depositories.  Additional 
examinations  are  made  upon  the  request  of  stockholders 
who  own  two  fifths  of  the  capital,  or  when  the  corporation 
commission  think  such  a  course  advisable.  The  examination 


162  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

is  possibly  more  thorough  than  that  made  by  a  national 
bank  examiner,  since  the  national  examiner  is  paid  fees 
while  the  state  examiner  is  paid  an  annual  salary  and  cannot 
increase  his  remuneration  by  undue  haste.  If  any  improper 
conditions  are  discovered,  the  corporation  commission  noti- 
fies the  officers  and  directors  of  the  institution;  and  if  the 
condition  is  not  corrected  within  a  reasonable  time,  not 
exceeding  thirty  days,  the  commission  may  apply  for  the 
appointment  of  a  receiver.  The  banking  institutions  must 
publish  in  a  local  paper  reports  similar  to  those  required  to 
be  published  by  national  banks.  The  expenses  of  this  bank- 
ing branch  of  the  corporation  commission  are  sustained  by 
fees  for  the  examination  of  banking  institutions.  These 
fees  vary  from  $35  to  $155  according  to  the  amount  of 
resources  of  the  banks  examined. 


CHAPTER   VII. 

FINANCES. 

Central  Officers. — There  are  three  state  officers  who 
handle  the  public  revenues:  the  treasurer,  the  auditor  of 
public  accounts,  and  the  second  auditor.  The  treasurer  is 
simply  the  custodian.  The  auditor  of  public  accounts 
receives  all  usual  revenues,  and  turns  them  over  to  the 
treasurer  for  safe  keeping;  and  all  usual  state  disburse- 
ments are  made  by  a  warrant  drawn  by  the  auditor  upon  the 
treasurer.  These  two  officers  come  down  from  Revolu- 
tionary times ;  but  the  office  of  a  second  auditor  dates  from 
1823.  It  was  created  to  relieve  the  auditor  of  public  accounts 
of  the  Internal  Improvements  Fund,  which  was  accumulat- 
ing as  a  result  of  the  policy  of  state  aid  to  internal  improve- 
ments. The  Literary  Fund  was  likewise  transferred  to  the 
second  auditor.  When  a  sinking  fund  was  created,  this 
was  naturally  placed  with  him.  The  Miller  Fund,  a  fund 
of  more  than  a  million  dollars  for  the  support  of  the  Miller 
School,  and  the  Retired  Teachers'  Fund  are  likewise  handled 
in  this  branch.  The  second  auditor's  duties  in  regard  to 
these  special  funds  is  the  same  as  those  of  the  auditor  in 
regard  to  all  other  usual  revenues. 

There  seems  to  be  no  justification  for  the  present  division 
of  functions  between  these  two  offices.  The  recent  addi- 
tion of  the  Retired  Teachers'  Fund  and  the  recent  policy 
of  making  small  loans  from  the  Literary  Fund  has  given 
the  second  auditor  enough  business;  but  assistants  to  the 
first  auditor1  could  perform  the  duties.  A  suggestion  in 
the  governor's  message  of  iox)62  seems  most  pertinent :  "  The 
first  auditor  should  settle,  collect,  and  deposit  all  moneys 

1  In  this  paper  "  first  auditor  "  or  simply  "  auditor  "  means  auditor 
of  public  accounts. 
1  Senate  Journal,  1906. 


164  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

coming  to  the  State,  but  he  should  be  wholly  unauthorized 
to  issue  his  warrant  upon  the  treasurer  for  any  sum  what- 
soever. The  latter  should  be  performed  by  the  second 
auditor,  who  should  make  no  collections  or  deposits,  and 
his  warrants  alone  should  be  recognized  by  the  treasurer. 
.  .  .  We  cannot  be  satisfied  with  the  present  system,  for 
under  it  we  have  lost  through  the  first  auditor's  office,  in  the 
past  forty  years,  more  than  $158,000,  and  we  should  have 
lost  much  more  but  for  the  honesty  of  our  officers."1 

The  suggestion  by  the  governor  resulted  in  the  creation 
of  a  legislative  committee  of  five  members  to  make  an  in- 
vestigation of  the  offices  at  Richmond  having  charge  of  the 
collection  and  disbursement  of  the  State's  revenues.  So 
far  as  the  committee  knew,  such  an  examination  had  never 
before  been  made.2  The  governor  of  the  State  in  his  mes- 
sage of  1876-1877  called  the  auditor's  methods  "antiquated, 
uneconomic,  and  subject  to  errors,"  but  for  thirty  years  no 
change  worthy  of  mention  was  effected.  The  legislative 
committee  appointed  in  1906  made  a  report  in  1908  which 
shows  that  a  careful  investigation  had  been  carried  on. 

This  report8  shows  that  in  the  absence  of  a  supervising 
power  there  has  grown  up  in  the  State's  offices  an  entire 
lack  of  uniformity  in  accounting.  "  Each  department  keeps 
its  accounts  independently  of  every  other  department. 
There  are  few  checks  and  balances  between  the  departments 
handling  the  funds.  Discrepancies  in  accounts  between  offices 
handling  in  succession  the  same  funds  have  been  discovered, 
which  existed  for  years  and  which  might  have  been  dis- 
covered and  corrected  immediately  had  any  system  of  com- 
paring accounts  prevailed. 

"  There  are  no  checks  upon  many  of  the  sources  of  reve- 

1  The  governor  here  refers  to  the  Smith  defalcation  of  about 
$158,000  in  1885  and  the  Shepherd  defalcation  of  $37,914  in  the  nine- 
ties. Both  defaulters  were  sent  to  the  penitentiary,  but  clerks  were 
then  not  required  to  give  bond,  and  the  auditor  was  not  held  respon- 
sible. Clerks  in  the  department  now  give  bond. 

a  There  had  been  previous  auditing  committees,  but  no  thorough 
examinations  had  been  made. 

3  House  Journal,  1908,  Doc.  No.  VI. 


Finances.  165 

nue  and  no  auditing  which  compels  the  payment  into  the 
treasury  of  funds  properly  due  the  State.  The  bookkeep- 
ing employed  in  many  departments  is  but  little  more  than 
mere  memoranda,  and  no  attempt  is  made  at  double  entry 
bookkeeping,  no  balance  sheets  can  be  made  at  stated 
periods,  and  few  of  the  usual  methods  used  to  detect  the 
errors  in  entries  are  used." 

The  committee  made  no  complaint  as  to  the  condition  of 
the  treasurer's  office.  Of  the  auditor's  office  the  committee 
said:  "While  we  find  nothing  in  the  records  of  this  office 
that  lead  us  to  believe  that  its  affairs  were  not  honestly 
administered  or  that  the  State  has  suffered  any  loss  since 
the  Shepherd  defalcation,  at  the  same  time  we  find  it  proper 
to  say,  that  if  errors  exist,  they  would,  under  the  system  of 
account  employed,  be  difficult  to  discover."  The  second 
auditor  lacked  a  proper  system,  but  accepted  the  sugges- 
tions of  the  accountants. 

The  secretary  of  the  Commonwealth  kept  his  records  with 
care  and  neatness,  but  accounts  dealing  with  financial  mat- 
ters were  crudely  kept.  The  penitentiary,  the  state  farm, 
and  the  Laurel  Reform  School  had  adopted  a  proper  system 
of  bookkeeping.  The  corporation  commission's  system  of 
accounting  needed  to  be  and  was  being  improved.  The 
system  of  bookkeeping  in  the  agricultural  department  did 
not  show  transactions  properly.  Annual  reports  could  not 
be  verified;  however,  from  the  books,  there  seemed  to  be 
no  shortages.1  The  board  of  agriculture  was  equally  re- 
sponsible with  the  commissioner.  The  committee  recom- 
mended that  funds  derived  from  the  sale  of  tags  should  be 
handled  directly  by  the  auditor ;  that  the  department  of  agri- 
culture should  have  nothing  to  do  with  them. 

In  concluding  the  committee  say :  "  We  are  convinced  that 
this  system  should  be  one  by  which  the  accounts  of  the 

1The  commissioner  of  agriculture  was  in  Europe  on  official  busi- 
ness at  the  time.  Being  a  practical  farmer,  he  knew  little  about  book- 
keeping, but  states  that  had  he  been  in  his  office  he  could  have  shown 
proper  records  of  transactions.  The  system  recommended  by  the 
accountant  has  been  adopted,  and  every  transaction  is  now  carefully 
shown. 


1 66  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

various  offices  come  into  and  correlate  with  the  books  in  the 
first  auditor's  office.  We  are  of  the  opinion  that  the  intro- 
duction and  operation  of  this  system  cannot  be  accomplished 
by  the  mere  enactment  of  law,  but  would  have  to  be  brought 
about  by  the  creation  of  a  bureau  of  audit,  which  should 
be  under  the  charge  of  a  competent  expert  accountant, 
assisted  by  such  traveling  auditors  as  may  be  found  neces- 
sary. He  should  be  given  full  power  to  install  such  a 
system  of  accounting  in  all  of  the  offices  of  the  State,  in- 
cluding clerks  and  treasurers  of  the  cities  and  counties,  and, 
furthermore,  he  should  be  empowered  to  compel  all  office- 
holders under  his  charge  to  keep  accounts  in  such  manner 
and  on  such  forms,  and  to  make  such  reports  as  he  may 
deem  necessary.  Annually,  or  oftener,  the  accountant 
should  audit  all  the  accounts  under  his  charge."  This  com- 
mittee thinks  that  the  second  auditor's  office  should  be 
abolished,  and  the  duties  should  be  performed  by  the  first 
auditor. 

Since  the  above  report  was  made  an  auditing  committee, 
composed  of  two  members  appointed  by  the  president  of 
the  Senate  and  three  members  appointed  by  the  speaker  of 
the  House,  has  annually  been  allowed  $2000  with  which  to 
employ  an  accountant,  after  allowing  themselves  $5  per 
diem  plus  expenses.1  This  special  accountant  examines 
annually  the  books  and  accounts  of  the  first  auditor,  state 
treasurer,  secretary  of  the  Commonwealth,  and  other  execu- 
tive officers  at  the  seat  of  government  whose  duties  pertain 
to  auditing  or  accounting  state  revenues.  The  accountant's 
report  is  made  to  the  governor  and  is  published  in  two 
newspapers.  This  special  accountant  has  brought  about  an 
improvement  in  the  system  of  accounting  at  the  seat  of 
government,  but  much  remains  to  be  done ;  and  local  offices, 
such  as  county  treasuries,  have  not  been  touched. 

Local  Officers. — The  State's  revenue  from  such  sources 
as  the  property  tax,  income  tax,  inheritance  tax,  and  licenses 
is  collected  for  the  state  auditor  by  the  county  treasurers, 

1  Acts,  1906,  c.  309. 


Finances.  1 67 

after  it  has  been  assessed  by  commissioners  of  the  revenue1 
and  land  assessors.  County  treasurers  since  1869  have 
been  elected  by  all  the  voters  of  the  county  for  a  term  of 
four  years.  One  or  more  commissioners  of  the  revenue  are 
elected  in  every  magisterial  district  (township)  or  city  for 
a  term  of  four  years.  The  term  of  office  has  been  as  short 
as  one  year;  and  from  1903  until  1911  the  appointment  was 
made  by  the  circuit  judge.2  The  constitution  of  1902  pro- 
vided for  appointment  instead  of  election ;  but  many  felt  that 
the  judges  were  not  acquainted  with  suitable  men,  and  were 
naturally  influenced  by  the  Democratic  leaders  at  the  county 
seats ;  especially  was  this  felt  in  Republican  counties.  Hence 
in  1910  the  constitution  was  amended,  and  the  commissioner 
is  again  elected.  During  the  whole  period,  one  land  assessor 
for  each  magisterial  district  has  been  appointed  every  fifth 
year,  with  one  exception,  by  the  judge.  The  one  exception 
was  in  1885  when,  for  political  reasons,  the  Readjuster 
party  had  the  land  assessors  appointed  by  a  county  or  city 
board,  composed  of  the  local  judge,  commonwealth-  attorney, 
and  clerk  of  the  county  or  city  court.  Until  the  county 
judge  was  superseded  by  the  circuit  judge,  the  former  ap- 
pointed him;  since  then,  the  circuit  judge  has  had  that  duty. 
Neither  election  by  the  people  nor  appointment  by  the 
judges  has  resulted  in  efficient  commissioners  of  the  revenue 
and  land  assessors ;  nor  will  it  ever  do  so.  No  approach  to 
fairness  and  efficiency  is  in  sight  unless  a  state  tax  commis- 
sion is  created.  This  commission  should  be  given  authority 
to  appoint  and  dismiss  one  or  more  tax  commissioners,  resi- 
dents or  non-residents,  for  each  county  and  city, — semi- 

1  The  constitution  of  1869  used  the  terms  "  city  commissioners  of 
the  revenue "  and  "  county  assessors."  Their  duties  were  identical. 
"  Commissioner  of  the  revenue  "  had  been  the  well-established  name 
in  Virginia,  hence  after  about  four  years  the  term  "  assessor "  was 
by  habit  dropped  from  official  documents,  except  for  the  district 
officer  known  as  the  "  land  assessor." 

3 The  judge  is  elected  every  eight  years  by  the  joint  vote  of  the 
General  Assembly,  hence  he  is  somewhat  dependent  upon  county 
patronage.  Another  method  which  seems  preferable  to  this  method 
of  electing  the  judge  would  be  to  have  the  governor  appoint  for  long 
terms  (for  instance,  eight  years),  with  a  veto  power  in  the  hands 
of  the  State  Bar  Association. 


1 68  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

experts,  who  will  devote  their  whole  time  to  assessing  and  to 
contriving  means  for  fair  assessment.  The  supervisor 
elected  by  each  magisterial  district  should  give  the  county 
tax  commissioner  local  advice  when  the  latter  is  assessing 
within  the  supervisor's  district.  This  plan  need  cost  no 
more  than  the  present  system;  yet  each  tax  commissioner 
would  receive  a  good  salary  because  he  would  devote  his 
whole  time  to  the  work;  and  by  becoming  expert  he  would 
do  the  work  in  much  less  time  than  the  present  officers. 
Should  this  change  seem  too  radical,1  the  answer  may  be 
made  that  it  is  the  lack  of  this  "  radical "  efficiency  that  is 
causing  state  functions  to  slip  into  the  control  of  the  Fed- 
eral Government.  However,  if  this  is  too  great  a  change, 
the  creation  of  a  state  tax  commission  with  power  merely 
to  remove  locally  elected  commissioners  of  the  revenue 
would  be  some  improvement. 

A  temporary  tax  commission  is  now  preparing  a  number 
of  reports  on  the  Virginia  tax  system.  These  reports,  the 
first  serious  extensive  reports  on  taxation  ever  made  in  Vir- 
ginia, will  be  presented  to  the  General  Assembly  of  1912. 
It  is  hoped  that  a  permanent  commission  will  be  created  by 
this  General  Assembly. 

Property  Tax. — During  the  period  from  1869  to  the 
present  day  real  estate  has  been  assessed  every  five  years 
by  the  "  land  assessors,"  but  personalty  and  new  buildings 
have  been  assessed  annually  by  commissioners  of  the 
revenue.  The  state  laws  have  provided  for  the  assessment 
of  realty  and  personalty  at  their  market  value,  and  the  con- 
stitution of  1902  provides  that  "all  assessments  of  real 
estate  and  tangible  personal  property  shall  be  at  their  fair 
market  value." 

The  Richmond  Whig  Daily  for  January  23,  1872,  seriously 
alleged  that  the  property  of  the  State  was  assessed  at  three 
or  four  times  its  market  value;  and  the  governor  in  his 
message  of  the  same  year  stated  that  it  was  assessed  up  to 
its  full  market  value.  This,  however,  was  due  to  the  fact 

1  It  would  require  an  amendment  to  the  constitution. 


Finances. 


169 


that  so  soon  after  the  war  there  was  scarcely  any  market 
for  the  property.  Four  years  later  the  following  governor 
pointed  out  "gross  inequalities"  and  "premiums  on  dis- 
honesty and  oppression  of  the  poor."  "Tax-payers  prac- 
tically assess  themselves."  Like  several  other  later  gov- 
ernors, he  recommended  a  board  of  equalization.  The  fol- 
lowing table  shows  to  what  extent  personal  property  has 
been  assessed  at  its  "  fair  market  value  " : 

PERSONAL  PROPERTY. 


Year. 

U.  S.  Census  valuation. 

Assessed  valuation. 

Percentage. 

I880 
1890 
IQOO 
1904 

$168,399,000 
209,847.256 
304,583,410 
361,114,240 

$  70,391,018 
90,110,467 
107,279,401 
122,673,713 

4L7 
42.8 

35-2 
33-9 

This  disparity  between  the  assessed  valuation  in  different 
counties  is  extreme.  In  1906  the  average  assessed  value  of 
horses  in  Halifax  county  was  $42  per  head ;  in  Pittsylvania, 
an  adjoining  county,  $21 ;  in  Henri co,  $91 ;  in  Floyd,  $17. 
The  city  of  Portsmouth  in  1910  returned  no  clocks,  watches, 
nor  musical  instruments.  The  following  table  gives  some 
average  assessed  values  in  counties  and  cities  for  1910: 


State 
average. 

Highest  county  or  city 
average. 

Lowest  county  or 
city  average. 

Loudoun 
county 
average. 

Grayson 
county 
average. 

Horses  

$6O.20 

$101.38,  Richmond 

$19.71,  Grayson. 

$84.99 

#19.71 

city. 

Cattle  

I5.S6 

28.21,  Loudoun 

5.14,  Grayson. 

28.21 

5-14 

county. 

Sheep  

3-00 

7.60,  Alexandria 

i.oo,  Buchanan. 

4.92 

1.12 

county. 

Hogs  

3-37 

5.97,  Richmond 

1.09,  Buchanan. 

5-34 

1.16 

county. 

Watches  ... 

8.38 

27  93,  Norfolk 

I.oo,  Floyd. 

7-24 

«.5« 

county. 

Note :  For  these  figures  the  writer  is  indebted  to  Mr.  D.  S.  Free- 
man, Secretary  of  the  State  Tax  Commission. 


There  are  thirty-five  counties  which  receive   from  the 
State  m6re  money  for  schools,  criminal  charges,  commis- 


170  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

sions  to  commissioners  of  the  revenue,  and  returned  capita- 
tion taxes  than  they  pay  in  for  all  purposes.1  These 
"charity  counties"  are  fairly  well  distributed,  though  they 
are  most  numerous  in  the  extreme  southwest;  and  if  a  line 
is  drawn  from  Washington,  D.  C.,  to  Lynchburg  and  thence 
due  west,  Amherst  and  Greene  are  the  only  two  "charity 
counties "  of  the  thirty  counties  contained  in  this  north- 
western angle.  There  are  no  "  charity  cities." 

The  disparity  of  assessment  of  two  pieces  of  property 
within  the  same  county  is  perhaps  as  extreme  as  that  be- 
tween different  counties.  While  writing  this  section  a  daily 
paper  reported  the  sale  of  400  acres  of  orchard  land  for 
$150,000  in  one  of  the  counties  in  the  northern  part  of  the 
State.  Correspondence  with  the  county  treasurer  disclosed 
that  the  farm  of  1200  acres  was  assessed  in  1910  at  $30,600. 
Eight  hundred  acres  remain  in  the  farm  which  are  worth 
fully  as  much  as  the  400  acres  that  were  sold.  In  other 
words,  a  $300,000  farm  was  assessed  for  $30,600,  or  10 
per  cent,  of  its  market  value,  in  a  county  whose  average 
assessed  value  on  realty  is  38  per  cent,  of  its  market  value. 
That  is,  since  38  per  cent,  is  the  average  assessment  and 
this  valuable  property  was  assessed  for  10  per  cent,  of  its 
value,  owners  of  small  pieces  of  land  or  humble  dwellings 
must  have  been  assessed  at  60  or  70  per  cent,  of  the  actual 
market  value.  Hence  the  poor  property  owner  pays  in  pro- 
portion to  his  ability  six  or  seven  times  as  much  tax  as  the 
wealthy  property  owner.  Nor  is  this  exceptional.  Large 
blue  grass  farms  in  southwest  Virginia  worth  from  $50  to 
$100  an  acre  are  assessed  at  from  $5  to  $10  an  acre. 

A  board  of  equalization  could  to  some  extent  remedy  the 
inequalities  between  counties.  By  requiring  the  true  con- 
sideration involved  in  the  transfer  of  realty  to  be  stated  in 
each  deed  recorded,  it  could  be  determined  approximately 
what  percentage  of  the  market  value  of  realty  is  the  assessed 
value.  For  example,  if  the  assessed  valuation  in  Accomac 
County  is  50  per  cent,  of  its  market  value,  all  realty  assess- 

1  Auditor's  Report,  1910,  Table  No.  36. 


Finances.  171 

ments  should  be  multiplied  by  two;  if  in  York  County  the 
assessed  value  is  40  per  cent,  of  its  market  value,  all  assess- 
ments should  be  multiplied  by  two  and  one  half.  Then  after 
all  assessments  have  been  raised  to  market  value  the  state 
tax  rate  could  be  reduced  to  15  or  20  cents  on  the  hundred 
dollars  instead  of  35,  its  present  rate.1  But  an  equalization 
thus  carried  out  does  not  touch  the  problem  of  taxing  per- 
sonal property,  income,  or  inheritance ;  and  it  does  not  touch 
the  problem  as  to  inequality  between  individuals  within  the 
same  county.  Anything  short  of  a  permanent  tax  com- 
mission cannot  bring  very  extensive  relief. 

Income  Tax. — During  colonial  days  the  bulk  of  direct 
taxes  was  paid  in  the  form  of  a  poll-tax;  during  the  nine- 
teenth century  the  property  tax  was  the  main  dependence, 
though  as  the  State  developed  industries  other  than  agri- 
culture the  license  tax  became  a  very  important  supplement. 
The  property  tax  was  a  great  improvement  over  the  poll- 
tax,  which  had  become  grossly  unfair.  Today  we  find  that 
the  property  tax  no  longer  corresponds  to  ability  to  pay 
unless  it  is  supplemented  by  some  other  taxes;  and  no  tax 
would  be  so  just  as  the  income  tax  if  it  could  be  properly 
assessed. 

If  we  except  a  faculty  tax,  assessed  upon  attorneys,  mer- 
chants, physicans,  surgeons,  and  apothecaries  from  1786  to 
I79O,2  Virginia's  taxation  of  income  began  in  i843.3  This 
was  a  tax  of  one  per  cent.  "  on  incomes  "of  employees  in 
excess  of  $400,  and  2^/2  per  cent,  on  all  interest.  The  con- 
stitution of  1850  practically  restricted  the  income  tax  to  in- 
comes from  salaries.  In  1853  a  graduated  tax  ranging  from 
one  fourth  of  one  per  cent,  on  incomes  of  $250  to  one  per 
cent,  on  incomes  of  $1000  or  more  was  enacted ;  but  laborers 
in  mechanic  arts,  trade,  handicraft,  or  manufacture  and 
ministers  of  the  gospel  were  excluded  from  its  operation.4 
These  rates  were  soon  doubled. 

1  The  state  rate  in  1860  was  40  cents  on  the  hundred  dollars.  After 
the  War  it  was  50  cents,  until  1882  when  it  was  reduced  to  40  cents. 
In  1903  it  was  again  reduced  to  35  cents. 

"Henning's  Statutes,  XII,  p.  283;  XIII,  p.  114. 

"Acts,  1842-43,  p.  6-8. 

4  In  1858  revenue  from  this  income  tax  was  $104,000. 


172  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

In  1862  a  heavy  general  income  tax  was  enacted  from 
which  a  substantial  war  revenue  was  derived.  The  constitu- 
tion of  1869  allowed  a  tax  "  on  incomes  in  excess  of  $600." 
In  1870  a  general  income  tax  of  2^2  per  cent,  on  incomes  in 
excess  of  $1500  was  imposed.1  Very  little  revenue  resulted 
in  1870.  In  1871  it  was  reduced  to  il/2  per  cent,  on  incomes 
in  excess  of  $iooo.2  In  1874  it  was  further  reduced  to  one 
per  cent,  on  incomes  in  excess  of  $600  ;3  and  it  remained  at 
this  figure  until  1908.  The  law  was  reenacted  in  1898* 
with  no  changes  in  the  rate  or  the  amount  exempted.  It 
was  intended  to  make  the  brief  provisions  more  explicit; 
but  the  law  was  drawn  with  little  care.  For  example,  who 
knows  what  the  following  words  mean:  "amount  of  all 
premiums  on  gold,  silver  or  coupons"?  Since  I9o85  only 
the  aggregate  amount  of  income  in  excess  of  $1000  has 
been  taxed. 

The  tax  has  always  been  assessed  in  the  same  manner  as 
the  personal  property  tax,  that  is,  each  person  assessed  states 
whether  or  not  his  net  income  exceeds  $1000.  During  the 
past  decade  it  has  not  been  assessed  at  all  in  from  25  to  30 
per  cent,  of  the  counties.  Until  the  first  decade  of  the 
twentieth  century  the  total  revenue  from  the  income  tax  had 
not  exceeded  $50,000  since  the  Civil  War.  It  has  now  in- 
creased to  about  $ioo,ooo.6 

1  Acts,  1869-70,  c.  189. 

*  Acts,  1870-71,  c.  72. 

*  Acts,  1874,  c.  24. 

4  Acts,  1897-98,  c.  496. 
'Acts,  1908,  c.  10. 

*  The  auditor's  annual  reports  give  the  following  figures : 

Year.  Revenue. 

1901 $  46,023 

1902 59,253 

1903 60,357 

1904 64,781 

1905 70,954 

1906 77,414 

1907 94.291 

1908 i22,O';8 

1909 102,810 

1910 106,909 

1911 •' 129,429 


Finances.  173 

Virginia  is  the  only  American  Commonwealth  that  derives 
any  considerable  revenue  from  the  income  tax.  All  but  four 
of  the  States  that  have  tried  it  have  abandoned  it ;  and  Pro- 
fessor Seligman  in  his  recent  excellent  work  on  The  Income 
Tax1  is  convinced  that  an  income  tax  cannot  be  satisfactorily 
administered  except  by  the  Federal  Government.  Unless 
there  is  created  a  permanent  tax  commission  of  experts, 
with  power  to  appoint  or  at  least  to  dismiss  inefficient  tax 
assessors,  any  tax  reform  is  doomed.  But  if  this  is  done 
and  the  commission  is  allowed  to  draft  a  clear  detailed 
scientific  statute,  the  revenue  can  be  much  increased  with 
greater  justice  to  the  honest  citizens  who  now  declare  their 
incomes.  It  is  extremely  doubtful  whether  5  per  cent,  of 
the  commissioners  of  the  revenue  understand  the  present 
law,  and  not  a  few  citizens  with  a  net  income  in  excess  of 
$1000  do  not  know  that  there  is  an  income  tax.  The  only 
way  in  which  an  honest  farmer  can  be  made  to  realize  that 
his  net  income  exceeds  $1000  a  year  is  to  furnish  him  with 
a  printed  list  of  all  of  his  probable  sources  of  income,  and 
require  that  he  specify  his  various  items.  Even  then  it  is 
doubtful  whether  this  plan  would  justify  the  cost,  since 
comparatively  few  Virginia  farmers  exceed  $1000  net  profit 
if  wages  are  allowed  to  members  of  their  families. 

The  city  of  Staunton  imposes  an  income  tax,  though  it 
has  no  specific  permission  to  do  so.  It  bases  its  right  on  a 
general  grant  of  taxing  power  in  its  charter. 

Railroad  Tax. — During  the  thirties,  especially  in  1836,  the 
year  preceding  the  financial  panic,  numerous  railroads  were 
chartered.  About  half  of  these  roads  were  exempted  from 
any  taxes  whatsoever.  Until  1856  the  only  tax  upon  the 
roads  not  exempted  from  taxation  was  the  state  general 
property  tax.  Beginning  with  that  year,  the  General  As- 
sembly provided  for  a  new  tax  to  take  the  place  of  the 
general  property  tax  for  railroads.  "  Every  railroad  not 
exempted  by  its  charter  from  taxation "  was  required  to 
report  to  the  state  auditor  "the  aggregate  number  of  miles 

"Part  II,  c.  ii. 


1/4  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

traveled  by  passengers,"  and  at  the  same  time  to  pay  a  "  tax 
of  one  mill  for  every  mile  of  transportation"  of  each  pas- 
senger. Every  railroad  company  paying  such  a  tax  was  not 
assessed  with  any  tax  upon  its  lands,  buildings,  or  equip- 
ments ;  but  if  it  failed  to  pay  this  tax  in  any  six  months,  then 
its  lands,  buildings,  and  equipments  were  immediately 
assessed,  under  the  direction  of  the  auditor  of  public  ac- 
counts, at  the  full  cost  of  construction  and  outfit,  and  a 
tax  was  at  once  levied  thereon,  as  on  other  real  estate,  to  be 
collected  by  the  sheriff  in  such  county  or  town  as  the  auditor 
should  direct.  The  only  guarantee  of  a  correct  statement  on 
the  part  of  the  railroad  companies  was  that  the  statement 
should  be  verified  by  the  oaths  of  the  president  and  superin- 
tendent of  transportation.1 

In  1860  a  tax  of  one  half  of  one  per  cent,  of  the  gross 
receipts  for  the  transportation  of  freight  was  imposed  in  ad- 
dition to  the  passenger  tax  of  1856,  and  upon  the  same  con- 
ditions.2 This  act,  however,  in  dealing  with  a  new  difficulty, 
added :  "  Such  company,  whose  road  ...  is  only  in  part 
within  the  Commonwealth,  shall  report  as  aforesaid  such 
portion  only  of  such  amount  received  for  the  transporta- 
tion of  freight,  as  the  part  of  the  said  road  .  .  .  ,  which 
is  within  this  Commonwealth,  bears  to  the  whole  of  such 
road."  During  the  war  period  the  tax  did  not  change  in 
kind,  but  the  rates  were  increased ;  and  railroad  charter  tax 
exemptions  were  annulled  for  the  war  period,  the  same  taxes 
being  placed  upon  all  the  roads  of  the  State.3 

The  constitution  of  1869  provided,  in  substance,  that  all 
taxation  should  be  equal,  uniform,  and  ad  valorem,  except  as 
to  incomes,  licenses,  and  capitation.  Hence  the  gross  receipt 
tax  on  railroads  had  to  be  discontinued.  In  1872,  in  addi- 
tion to  the  5  mill  state  tax  on  tangible  property,  a  tax  at  the 
same  rate  was  imposed  upon  railroad  bonded  indebtedness. 
All  bonds  of  the  railroads  were  to  be  taxed  one  half  of  one 

*  Acts,  1855-56,  c.  9,  sec.  35. 

*  Acts,  1859-60,  c.  3,  sees.  46, 47. 

*  Acts,  1862,  c.  i.    Whether  this  act  was  enforced  the  writer  could 
not  learn. 


Finances.  175 

per  cent,  of  their  market  value  j1  and  the  railroad  company 
was  to  deduct  this  tax  from  the  bondholders'  annual  interest, 
whether  the  bondholders  were  residents  or  non-residents  of 
the  State.  So  much  of  this  act  as  applied  to  non-residents 
was  declared  void.2  The  greater  part  of  the  bonds  were 
held  by  non-residents,  hence  the  tax  was  changed  to  an  in- 
come tax  of  one  per  cent,  of  the  net  receipts.  The  income 
was  ascertained  "  by  deducting  the  cost  of  operation,  repairs, 
and  interest  on  indebtedness,  from  gross  receipts."  Except 
that  stocks  and  bonds  in  the  hands  of  their  owners  were 
taxed  as  property  when  found,  this  income  tax  and  the 
general  property  tax  have  been  the  only  taxes  imposed  upon 
railroads  by  the  State  until  the  constitution  of  1902  made 
radical  changes. 

Counties3  were  not  allowed  to  tax  the  property  of  rail- 
roads until  1880.*  After  that  date  the  supervisors  of  the 
county  were  furnished  by  the  state  auditor  with  the  valua- 
tion upon  which  to  assess.  The  railroads  estimated,  for  the 
state  auditor,  the  value  of  property  located  in  each  county 
and  each  township  thereof.  The  board  of  public  works 
would  accept  or  alter  this  estimate;  and  upon  the  revised 
valuation  thus  made  both  state  and  local  taxes  were  assessed, 
the  county  supervisors  being  furnished  the  estimate  at  first 
by  the  auditor,  later  by  the  secretary  of  the  board  of  public 
works.  The  estimate  for  the  roadbed  was  a  definite  amount 
for  each  mile.  Though  the  roadbed  may  have  cost  twice 
as  much  per  mile  in  one  county  as  another,  the  mile  unit 
rule  was  followed.  Depots,  terminals,  rolling  stock,  etc., 
were  included  in  this  unit  assessment  until  i8o,2,5  when 

1  Bonds  were  chosen  instead  of  stocks  because  all  the  roads  were 
heavily  bonded  and  stocks  were  paying  no  dividends. 

2  A  creditor  who  is  not  within  the  jurisdiction  cannot  be  taxed, 
and  the  debts  cannot  be  taxed  in  the  debtor's  hands  because  of  a 
fiction  of  the  law  which  treats  them  as  being  for  this  purpose  the 
property  of  the  debtors. 

*  Cities  derive  their  power  to  tax  through  specific  grants  in  their 
charters;  and  for  some  years  the  cities  had  been  taxing  the  property 
of  railroads,  including  all  rolling  stock. 

4  Acts,  1879-80,  c.  106. 

*  Acts,  1891-92,  c.  254. 


176  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

county  or  corporation  commissioners  of  the  revenue  were 
allowed  to  assess  railroad  property  other  than  the  roadbed ; 
but  the  rolling  stock  is  taxed  in  that  city  and  county  where 
it  remains  when  not  in  use. 

As  a  result  of  the  constitution  of  1902  railroad  taxation 
has  been  much  modified.  The  duties  of  assessment  for- 
merly carried  out  by  the  board  of  public  works  are  now  per- 
formed by  the  state  corporation  commission.  The  railroad 
companies  report  to  this  commission  all  property,  tangible 
and  intangible,  in  each  school  district  of  each  county  of  the 
State  and  in  each  city  of  the  State.  The  state  corporation 
commission  assesses  all  such  property  and  reports  the  same 
to  the  state  auditor  of  public  accounts  for  collection,  and  also 
to  the  presidents  of  the  railroad  companies.  The  commis- 
sion at  the  same  time  reports  the  assessments  for  the  coun- 
ties and  cities  to  the  county  supervisors  or  city  council,  who 
impose  the  local  rates  upon  the  same  amount  of  railroad 
assessment  as  the  State  has  levied  its  rates  upon. 

In  addition  to  the  state  tax  on  tangible  property,1  an  addi- 
tional franchise  tax  "  equal  to  one  per  cent,  upon  the  gross 
transportation  receipts  "  is  imposed,  but  shares  of  stock  in 
the  hands  of  the  individual  owners  are  exempt  from  taxa- 
tion. The  amount  of  gross  receipts  for  interstate  railroads 
is  determined  "  by  ascertaining  the  average  gross  transporta- 
tion receipts  per  mile  over  its  whole  extent  within  and 
without  this  State,  and  multiplying  the  result  by  the  number 
of  miles  operated  within  this  State ;  provided,  that  from  the 
sum  so  ascertained  there  may  be  deducted  a  reasonable  sum 
because  of  any  excess  of  value  of  the  terminal  facilities  or 
advantages  situated  in  this  State."2 

The  maximum  state  tax  received  from  railroads  previous 
to  the  Constitutional  Convention  of  1902  was  $264,594.  In 
1910,  including  electric  lines,  it  was  $961,286.  In  1904  the 
state  corporation  commission  assessed  the  tangible  value  of 
railroads  in  Virginia  at  $63,269,632.  Bulletin  23  of  the 
Census  Bureau  estimated  the  commercial  value  of  railroads 

1  Now  3S  cents  on  the  hundred  dollars. 
3  Virginia  Code,  1904,  p.  2206. 


Finances.  1 77 

operating  property  in  the  State  for  the  same  year  at  $211,- 
315,000,  or  an  average  of  $53,700  per  mile.  The  General 
Assembly  of  1906  asked  for  an  explanation.  The  com- 
mission's reply1  gives  a  clear  idea  of  the  basis  upon  which 
railroad  property  is  assessed. 

The  commission  says,  in  substance,  that  the  franchise  tax, 
with  the  property  tax,  is  in  lieu  of  all  other  taxes  or  license 
charges  whatsoever  upon  the  franchises  of  railway  corpora- 
tions. The  commercial  value  of  $211,315,000  represents  the 
net  earnings  capitalized,2  and  much  of  the  earnings  result 
from  the  franchise3  which  has  a  gross  receipt  tax  in  lieu  of 
other  taxes.  Hence  the  franchise  tax  for  the  year,  one  per 
cent,  of  the  gross  receipts,  or  $354,173,  represents  a  tax  of 
35  cents  on  $100  (state  rate)  for  $101,192,374  worth  of 
property.  Add  to  this  the  property  assessment  of  $63,269,- 
623,  and  the  roads  have  paid  state  taxes  on  $164,461,997 
worth  of  property,  which  is  78  per  cent,  of  the  government 
commercial  valuation  of  $211,315,000.  Personal  property 
in  the  State  is  assessed  at  only  34  per  cent,  of  the  value 
assigned  to  it  by  the  United  States  estimate  for  1904,  hence 
the  railroads  are  taxed  more  than  twice  as  heavily  as  per- 
sonal property.  The  same  condition  exists  in  regard  to 
realty. 

But  it  must  not  be  forgotten  that  the  franchise  value  is  to 
a  considerable  extent  the  gift  of  the  State,  and  therefore 
a  part  of  the  tax  is  in  the  nature  of  rent.  Also,  as  the  tax 
on  railroads  is  in  the  nature  of  an  indirect  tax,  the  amount 
may  vary  considerably  without  affecting  the  earnings.  It  is 
one  of  the  fixed  charges,  and  the  State  is  prohibited  by  the 
Federal  courts  from  prescribing  rates  which  reduce  divi- 
dends below  a  reasonable  return.  The  only  reasons  why  all 

1  Senate  Journal,  1906,  Doc.  No.  4. 

"The  average  net  earnings  for  a  period  of  five  years  are  capi- 
talized at  a  rate  obtained  by  dividing  the  annual  net  income  by  the 
market  price  of  stocks  and  bonds. 

*  The  commission  define  franchise  to  mean  the  value  of  the  charter, 
priority  in  possession  of  the  location,  good-will,  present  contracts, 
collection  of  stockholders  for  the  particular  business,  or  the  com- 
pany in  operation. 


178  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

state  revenue  might  not  be  raised  through  the  railroads  is 
the  fact  that  higher  freight  and  passenger  rates  might  im- 
pede commerce,  and  that  the  incidence  of  the  tax  would  fall 
upon  the  consumer. 

Railroad  Exemption  from  Taxes. — All  railroads  that  were 
granted  charters  exempting  them  from  taxation  forfeited 
these  exemptions  when  they  consolidated  into  trunk  lines, 
except  the  Richmond,  Fredericksburg,  and  Potomac,  which 
has  never  consolidated.  In  its  charter  of  1834  is  the  fol- 
lowing provision:  "All  machines,  wagons,  vehicles,  and 
carriages,  purchased,  as  aforesaid,  with  the  funds  of  the 
company,  and  all  their  works  constructed  under  the  author- 
ity of  this  act,  and  all  profits  which  shall  accrue  from  the 
same,  shall  be  vested  in  the  respective  share-holders  of  the 
company  forever,  in  proportion  to  their  respective  shares, 
and  the  same  shall  be  deemed  personal  estate,  and  shall  be 
exempt  from  any  public  charge  or  tax  whatsoever." 

The  constitution  of  1902  provided  that  each  "  railway  .  .  .  , 
including  also  any  such  as  is  exempt  from  taxation  as  to 
its  work,  visible  property,  or  profits,  shall  also  pay  an  annual 
state  franchise  tax  equal  to  one  per  cent,  upon  the  gross 
receipts."  It  is  maintained  by  the  State  that  a  franchise  is  a 
species  of  property  different  from  the  tangible  property 
defined  in  the  above  exemption  clause,  hence  that  neither 
its  franchise  nor  the  profits  which  shall  accrue  from  the 
same  are  exempt  from  taxation.  The  railroad  claimed  that 
the  law  impaired  the  obligation  of  a  contract. 

This  franchise  tax  has  been  annually  assessed,  but  never 
paid.  In  1907  the  tax  was  tested  in  the  circuit  court  for  the 
city  of  Richmond.  But  the  State  claimed  an  additional 
ground  for  taxing  all  the  property  of  the  railroad.  Section 
158  of  the  present  constitution  of  Virginia  provides  that 
"  Every  corporation  heretofore  chartered  in  this  State,  which 
shall  hereafter  accept,  or  effect,  any  amendment  or  extension 
of  its  charter,  shall  be  exclusively  presumed  to  have  thereby 
surrendered  every  exemption  from  taxation." 

On  April  2,   1902,  the  General  Assembly,  having  been 


Finances.  1 79 

prohibited  from  granting  any  charters  by  the  constitution 
of  the  same  year,  passed  an  act  allowing  certain  privileges 
to  railroads  without  a  special  permit.  Among  these  privi- 
leges is  one  allowing  railroads  to  lay  double  tracks ;  another 
allows  them  to  change  the  roadbed  within  certain  limits. 
The  Richmond,  Fredericksburg,  and  Potomac  shortly  there- 
after built  a  second  track  for  its  entire  length,  and  moved 
the  roadbed  in  order  to  straighten  curves  to  the  extent  of 
twenty-six  miles.  The  Virginia  court  of  appeals  in  1910 
rendered  a  decision  in  which  they  passed  over  the  question 
as  to  whether  the  road  is  exempt  from  a  franchise  tax,  but 
decided  that  by  accepting  the  last  named  privilege  the  road 
had  impliedly  amended  its  charter,  and  should  forfeit  all 
exemptions,  both  state  and  local.  The  case  has  been  ap- 
pealed to  the  United  States  Supreme  Court,  but  the  decision 
will  likely  be  upheld ;  in  this  event  each  railroad  of  the  State 
will  stand  upon  a  tax  equality  with  every  other. 

Banks. — Since  1871  the  capital  of  banks  has  not  been 
taxed  as  such,  but  the  stockholders  have  been  taxed  upon 
the  market  value  of  their  shares  of  stock  at  the  same  rate 
as  other  moneyed  capital ;  and  this  tax,  always  having  been 
assessed  by  the  local  commissioner  of  the  revenue,  has  been 
paid  by  the  bank  directly  to  the  state  auditor  of  public  ac- 
counts. In  1874,  from  a  United  States  Supreme  Court  de- 
cision in  regard  to  the  taxation  of  bonds  held  by  non- 
residents of  the  State,  it  was  believed  that  the  taxation  of 
bank  stock  of  non-residents  was  unconstitutional.  From 
that  date  until  1884  non-residents  were  therefore  not  taxed ; 
but  as  the  court  made  a  distinction  between  the  taxation  of 
stocks  and  of  bonds,  bank  stock  of  both  residents  and  non- 
residents has  since  then  been  taxed. 

From  1874  to  1884  the  total  assessed  value  of  realty 
owned  by  the  bank  was  deducted  from  the  total  market  value 
of  the  bank  stock,  and  the  residue  of  bank  stock  was  as- 
sessed. From  1884  until  1908  no  deduction  was  made;  but 
now  the  assessed  value  of  real  estate  owned  by  the  bank 
may  be  deducted  from  the  total  value  of  the  shares  of  stock ; 


180  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

this  value  is  determined  by  adding  together  capital,  surplus, 
and  undivided  profits.  But  if  the  bank,  as  a  principal 
debtor,  owes  money  which  is  a  legitimate  offset  to  the  above, 
it  may  deduct  the  amount  of  the  debt  to  the  extent  of  ten 
per  cent,  of  the  total  actual  value  of  the  shares  of  stock  as 
ascertained  above. 

Since  1874  counties  and  cities  have  been  specifically 
granted  the  right  to  tax  bank  stocks  at  the  bank,  like  the 
State ;  and  in  1898  "  towns  "  were  likewise  granted  permis- 
sion. The  stock  of  both  residents  and  non-residents  of  the 
State  has  been  taxed  by  the  localities  where  the  bank  is  situ- 
ated ;  but  since  1890,  if  a  commissioner  of  the  revenue  in 
the  county  or  city  of  an  owner  of  stock,  living  within  the 
State,  certifies  that  the  tax  has  there  been  paid,  the  com- 
missioner in  the  county  or  city  where  the  bank  is  situated 
must  deduct  the  same.  Since  1896  unpaid  taxes  on  bank 
stock  have  been  a  lien  upon  the  stock.  The  county  or  city 
treasurer  can  sell  stock  and  give  a  bill  of  sale  which,  when 
presented  to  the  bank,  will  cause  the  stock  to  be  trans- 
ferred.1 The  banks  complain  that  while  personal  property 
in  general  is  found  and  assessed  only  to  the  extent  of  about 
thirty- four  per  cent,  of  its  market  value,  they  are  assessed 
upon  the  full  fair  value  of  their  stock. 

Capitation  Tax.2 — Just  before  the  Civil  War  the  capita- 
tion tax  was  80  cents  on  white  males,  and  for  every  slave 
over  twelve  years  of  age  there  was  a  property  tax  equal  to 
the  tax  on  $300  worth  of  property.  The  state  rate  was  40 
cents  on  the  hundred,  and  therefore  for  every  slave  over 
twelve  years  of  age  a  tax  of  $1.20  was  paid.  The  constitu- 
tion of  1869  imposed  a  $i  capitation  tax  on  all  males  over 
twenty-one  years  of  age.  This  continued  until  the  constitu- 
tion of  1902.  Since  then  the  state  tax  of  $i  has  remained, 
but  50  cents  additional  is  paid  into  the  state  treasury  and  re- 

1  For  the  above  section  the  following  statutes  have  been  used : 
Acts,  1870-71,  c.  201 ;  1874,  c.  242 ;  1883-84,  c.  458,  sec.  17 ;  1889-90, 
c.  141;  1895-96,  c.  169;  1897-98,  c.  453;  1902-3-4,  c.  457;  1908,  c. 
213;  Code  1887,  sec.  833. 

*  Also  see  "  Electorate." 


Finances.  1  8  1 

turned  to  the  county  or  city.  This  represents  a  compromise 
between  those  members  of  the  convention  who  favored  a 
$i  tax  and  those  who  favored  a  $2  tax. 

Since  1904  Grayson  and  Patrick  counties  have  been  per- 
mitted to  impose  an  additional  capitation  tax  of  $i.1  This 
seems  to  be  unwise  for  two  reasons.  First,  there  is  little 
justification  for  the  capitation  tax  when  imposed  for  revenue 
purposes  alone.  Second,  since  the  counties,  as  a  result  of  this 
source  of  income,  will  need  a  lower  property  tax  for  county 
purposes,  the  assessed  valuation  can  be  made  low.  As  the 
state  taxes  are  paid  upon  the  same  valuations  as  the  county, 
the  State  is  the  loser.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  assessed 
values  of  personalty  in  Grayson  County  are  the  lowest  of 
any  county  in  the  State.  Its  assessed  values  of  realty  are 
among  the  lowest.  The  assessed  values  in  Patrick  County 
'are  likewise  among  the  very  lowest.  The  reason  why  as- 
sessed valuations  in  cities  are  higher  than  elsewhere  is  the 
necessity  of  providing  more  revenue  for  the  many  public 
services. 

From  1872  until  1877  the  payment  of  the  capitation  tax 
by  a  father  was  a  prerequisite  for  the  sending  of  his  children 
to  the  public  free  schools.2  From  1877  until  1882  it  was  a 
prerequisite  to  voting,  as  it  has  also  been  since  January  I, 
1904.  In  1896  it  was  made  a  lien  on  real  property  ;  but  since 
1903  real  estate  may  not  be  sold  to  satisfy  the  lien  until  the 
taxes  have  become  three  years  overdue.  The  only  provision 
that  has  had  any  effect  upon  the  payment  of  capitation  taxes 
is  that  making  it  a  prerequisite  to  voting.  Making  the  pay- 
ment a  prerequisite  to  sending  children  to  the  public  schools 
did  not  bring  financial  results  ;  it  was  not  enforced.  The 
law  of  1896  making  the  tax  a  lien  upon  realty  had  no  effect 
because  those  owning  realty  had  always,  with  few  excep- 
tions, paid  the  tax. 

From  1896  until  1903  the  state  revenues  from  capitation 
taxes  increased  less  than  5  per  cent.  The  tax  was  made  a 


1904,  c.  192. 
3  This  was  aimed  at  the  negro. 


182  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

prerequisite  to  voting  in  1903,  and  notwithstanding  the  fact 
that  one  third  of  the  electorate  was  disfranchised  and  that 
50  cents  was  added  for  the  county,  the  state  revenue  from 
this  source  increased  more  than  10  per  cent,  by  1910,  when 
the  State  received  $284,578.1 

Liquor  Tax. — In  the  year  1870  there  was  imposed  on 
ordinaries,  that  is,  bar-rooms,  a  specific  state  tax  of  $50  and 
an  additional  tax  ranging  from  $5  to  $100  in  proportion  to 
the  amount  of  sales.2  The  amount  of  sales  was  estimated 
by  the  sales  of  the  previous  year;  but  if  the  concern  was 
new,  it  had  to  report  quarterly  to  the  commissioner  the 
revenue  for  the  first  year.  In  1877  the  MofTatt  Law  retained 
the  specific  tax,  which  had  been  increased  to  $100  in  towns 
of  more  than  two  thousand  population,  but  in  addition 
measured  the  sales  by  the  glass.  The  tax  on  alcoholic 
liquors  or  wine  was  2l/2  cents  a  half  pint  or  fraction  thereof, 
on  malt  liquors,  */>  cent.  Every  bar  had  to  install  two 
Moffatt  Registers,  one  for  spirituous  liquors  and  one  for 
malt  liquors.  These  registers  were  supplied  by  the  state 
auditor  for  $10,  but  were  delivered  by  the  local  commis- 
sioner of  the  revenue  who  collected  this  tax  monthly.  When 
the  registration  sales  amounted  to  one  half  of  the  specific 
license,  one  half  of  the  latter  was  returned.  There  were 
other  details  which  need  not  be  mentioned.  The  framers  of 
the  law  expected  enormous  revenue  from  this  source.  The 
machine  was  placed  in  a  conspicuous  place  where  the  regis- 
tration could  be  seen  every  time  the  crank  was  turned  and 
the  bell  rang.  But  the  patriotism  of  the  bartenders  and 
drinking  public  did  not  come  up  to  the  expectation  of  the 
framers  of  the  law.  Somehow  the  bell  would  not  ring ;  and 
when  it  did  ring,  too  often  it  was  the  bell  of  the  beer,  l/2 
cent  registration,  when  it  should  have  been  the  whiskey, 
2l/2  cent  registration.  No  detectives  were  employed  to  en- 
force the  law.  A  large  part  of  those  drinking  at  the  bars 
were  negroes  who  could  not  read,  and  did  not  know  which 

1  In  addition  to  this,  $142,289  was  collected,  for  the  counties. 
3  Acts,  1869-70,  c.  174,  266. 


Finances.  183 

was  the  whiskey  and  which  was  the  beer  register;  and  the 
whites  who  frequented  the  saloons  were  not  interested  in 
enforcing  the  law. 

In  1880  the  Moffatt  Law  was  repealed,  and  in  its  place 
was  imposed  a  specific  tax  of  $62.50  in  towns  of  less  than 
two  thousand  inhabitants  and  of  $125  in  others,  plus  15 
per  cent,  of  the  rental  value  of  the  rooms  in  which  the  bar 
was  conducted.  In  1904  the  specific  tax  was  placed  at  $175 
in  towns  under  one  thousand  inhabitants,  $350  in  others; 
and  there  was  no  supplemental  state  tax.  Since  1910  a 
specific  tax  of  $550  has  been  paid  regardless  of  the  size  of 
the  town;  the  tax  is  $1000  if  the  retailer  ships  bottles  or 
jugs.  There  is  also  a  tax  of  $500  on  sample  liquor  mer- 
chants who  may  sell  only  to  parties  having  licenses  in  wet 
territory.  The  salesman  of  a  firm  holding  a  wholesale 
license  ($1250)  need  not  pay  this  tax. 

The  specific  tax  without  any  supplement  is  the  easiest  to 
administer,  and  it  discourages  small  saloons  in  residential 
sections,  which  are  the  most  objectionable  saloons.  The 
high  license  cannot  be  considered  a  tax,  but  a  fine.  The 
amount  is  not  based  on  principles  of  equity,  but  of  tolerance. 
However,  because  nine  tenths  of  the  territory,  containing 
about  three  fourths  of  the  population,  is  "  dry,"  the  six 
hundred  and  eighty  saloons  now  in  the  State  will  bear  heavy 
local  taxes  because  they  are  to  some  extent  distributing 
points ;  and  as  long  as  the  State  tolerates  these  saloons  it 
should  derive  a  license  equal  to  the  local  license,  since  the 
cost  of  crime,  insanity,  and  to  some  extent  poverty  resulting 
from  drink  is  borne  by  the  State. 

Manufacturers  have  always  paid  in  some  proportion  to 
the  amount  manufactured.  Eating  houses  selling  intoxi- 
cating drinks  have  been  treated -much  like  ordinary  bars. 
Since  1882  clubs  have  ordinarily  been  treated  like  other 
dealers.  Druggists  did  not  need  licenses  to  fill  prescriptions 
until  1880;  since  that  date  they  have  not  been  allowed  to 
sell  without  licenses,  except  in  medical  mixtures. 

Virginia  Debt. — Between   1820  and   1861   Virginia  con- 


184  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

tracted  a  debt  amounting  to  $33,ooo,ooo,1  two  thirds  of 
which  was  contracted  after  1852.  This  debt  was  incurred 
for  such  works  of  public  improvement  as  canals,  turnpikes, 
bridges,  and  railroads  ;  but  about  two  thirds  of  it  was  used 
for  the  encouragement  of  railroads.2  Until  the  Civil  War, 
interest  was  punctually  paid;  and  in  1859  the  assets  of  the 
State  were  reported  at  $35,ooo,ooo,3  of  which  $io,ooo,ooo4 
was  productive,  yielding  $6oo,ooo5  in  dividends.6  During 
the  war  the  principal  remained  the  same,7  but  no  interest 
was  paid.  By  an  act  of  i8668  the  bondholders  were  allowed 
to  fund  the  accumulated  interest,  and  during  the  following 
three  years  the  State  paid  a  small  amount  of  interest.  On 
July  i,  1870,  the  total  debt,  including  compound  interest, 
was  $47,ooo,ooo.9 

West  Virginia  had  been  separated  from  the  Common- 
wealth of  Virginia  in  1863,  and  was  admitted  as  a  new  State 
under  a  constitution  which  declared  that  "  an  equitable  pro- 
portion of  the  public  debt  of  the  Commonwealth  of  Virginia 
prior  to  the  first  day  of  January,  1861,  shall  be  assumed  by 
this  State."10  Between  the  close  of  the  war  and  1870  all 
attempts  made  by  the  authorities  of  the  two  States  to  ascer- 
tain their  respective  portions  of  the  debt  proved  ineffectual. 
In  February  of  1870,  under  the  governorship  of  G.  C. 
Walker,  a  committee  of  three  was  appointed  to  confer  with 
a  similar  committee  which  he  requested  Governor  J.  J.  Jacob 
of  West  Virginia  to  appoint.11  By  December  of  the  same 
year  Governor  Walker  had  received  no  reply  from  the  gov- 


exact  amount  was  $33,080,509,  on  January  i,  1861. 
2  See  Board  of  Public  Works  above  ;  also  see  Tenth  U.  S.  Census, 
Vol.  VII,  p.  555,  for  an  itemized  statement  of  the  expenditures. 
The  exact  amount  was  $35,357,469. 
The  exact  amount  was  $10,057,584. 
8  The  exact  amount  was  $631,775. 
*  Senate  Journal  and  Documents,  1850-60,  No.  33,  p.  10. 

7  The  Confederate  States  were  reconstructed  on  condition  that  all 
war  debt  be  repudiated. 

8  March  2. 

"The  exact  amount  was  $47,090,867;  though  $1,610,324  received 
from  the  sale  of  the  state  stock  in  the  Richmond  and  Danville  and 
Richmond  and  Petersburg  Railroads  was  in  a  sinking  fund. 

10  Constitution  of  West  Virginia,  Art.  VIII,  sec.  8. 

"Acts,  1869-70,  c.  6. 


Finances.  185 

ernor  of  West  Virginia.  Moreover,  he  observed  the  extreme 
divergence  between  what  the  people  of  West  Virginia  con- 
sidered her  equitable  portion  of  the  debt  and  what  the  people 
of  Virginia  considered  it.  Hence,  Governor  Walker  recom- 
mended to  the  General  Assembly  of  Virginia  that  she  pro- 
pose to  West  Virginia  a  settlement  of  the  debt  by  arbitra- 
tion.1 The  General  Assembly  agreed  to  this,  and  the 
governor  tendered  to  the  State  of  West  Virginia  a  proposal 
of  "an  arbitration  of  all  matters  touching  a  full  and  fair 
apportionment  between  said  states  of  the  said  public  debt." 
Virginia  was  to  appoint  two  members  of  the  proposed  board 
of  arbitration,  not  citizens  of  Virginia;  West  Virginia  two, 
not  citizens  of  West  Virginia;  and  the  four  were  to  appoint 
a  fifth  if  they  saw  fit.  The  decision  of  the  board  was  to  be 
binding  on  both  States.  West  Virginia  declined. 

The  next  year  (1871)  Virginia  proceeded  to  refund  her 
debt.2  She  claimed  that  the  equitable  share  for  West  Vir- 
ginia was  one  third,3  and  proceeded  to  refund  two  thirds  of 
the  debt  into  6  per  cent,  coupon  or  registered  bonds.  For 
West  Virginia's  one  third  of  the  debt  the  following  certifi- 
cate was  given  the  holder  of  the  old  bond :  "  This  certifies 

that  $ is  due  the  Bearer,  being  one  third  of  an 

old  bond  which  has  been  surrendered.  Payment  of  which 
one  third  will  be  provided  for  in  accordance  with  a  settle- 
ment to  be  hereafter  had  with  West  Virginia.  And  Virginia 
holds  said  bonds,  so  far  as  unfunded,  in  trust  for  the  holder 
of  this  certificate." 

Virginia  agreed  to  pay  about  $1,800,000  annual  interest 
and  to  receive  the  interest  coupons  "  for  all  taxes,  debts, 
dues,  and  demands  due  the  State."  The  assets  of  the  State 

1  In  the  meantime  the  governor  of  West  Virginia  had  appointed 
three   commissioners,   but   their   instructions   were    so   unreasonable 
that  the  governor  was  sure  that  nothing  could  be  accomplished.    The 
three  West  Virginia  commissioners  proceeded,  however,  and  reported 
to  their  legislature  that  West  Virginia's  equitable  share  according 
to  the  "  Wheeling  Ordinance  "  was  less  than  $1,000,000. 

2  Acts,  1870-71,  c.  282. 

*  Because  one  third  of  the  territory  and  one  third  of  the  free  popu- 
lation had  been  severed. 


1 86  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia, 

were  producing  practically  no  dividends.1  The  preceding 
year  the  total  revenue  of  the  State  was  $i, 500,000  ;2  but  the 
governor,  by  juggling  with  figures  representing  unreason- 
able expectations  from  new  taxes,  induced  the  General 
Assembly  to  assume  more  than  the  people  could  reasonably 
bear.3  The  war  had  caused  the  State  to  lose  the  portion 
of  its  territory  containing  its  greatest  potential  wealth  in 
coal  and  timber ;  the  remainder  was  devastated,  and  without 
capital  with  which  to  recuperate.  The  value  of  agricultural 
products,  the  principal  dependence,  fell  off  from  $50,000,000 
in  1867  to  $30,000,000  in  i876.4  Universally  money  values 
were  falling,  and  the  burden  of  the  debt  was  thereby  in- 
creased. In  fact,  with  a  5  mill  state  property  tax  and  a 
license  on  everything  from  a  glass  of  beer  to  a  commercial 
traveler,5  the  total  revenues  did  not  exceed  $2,500,000  for 
more  than  a  decade. 

Naturally  many  were  dissatisfied  with  the  settlement. 
The  next  year  the  General  Assembly  repealed  the  "  tax- 
receivable  coupon  feature"  of  the  Funding  Bill.6  The  Vir- 
ginia court  of  appeals  and  the  United  States  Supreme  Court 
declared  the  act  unconstitutional  as  far  as  it  applied  to 
coupons  of  bonds  already  funded.  Until  the  debt  question 

1  The  governor  said  in  1873 :  "  Not  $500,000  [of  the  State's  assets] 
are  producing  any  income  to  the  State,  nor  is  there  any  probability 
of  their  doing  so  for  years  to  come  if  owned  by  her"  (Senate  Jour- 
nal, 1873,  Doc.  No.  8). 

2  The  exact  amount  was  $1,529,853. 

3  Property  was  assessed  higher  than  in  other  parts  of  the  Union. 
The  United  States  Census  valuation  of  all  property  in  Virginia  in 
1870  was  $409,588,130.     The  Virginia  assessment  was  $336,686,433, 
or  82  per  cent,  of  the  United  State  Census  estimate.     Throughout 
the  Union  the  state  assessments  were  only  47  per  cent,  of  the  na- 
tional estimate.     The  assessed  values  in  1860,  exclusive  of  West  Vir- 
ginia and  slaves,  were  only  $395,880,191,  although  the  crops  of  the 
agricultural  State  had  fallen  off  enormously.     For  example,  in  1860, 
123,968,312  pounds  of  tobacco  were  grown  almost  exclusively  in  the 
old  State.     In  1870  only  37,086,364  pounds  were  grown.     See  Senate 
Journal,  1874-75,  Doc.  No.  i,  page  19. 

*  Reports  of  the  U.  S.  Commissioner  of  Agriculture. 

8  As  early  as  1852  a  tax  of  $200  was  imposed  on  sample  merchants. 
In  1887  this  tax  was  declared  unconstitutional  except  as  a  police 
regulation.  For  example,  a  liquor  sample  merchant  is  now  taxed 
$500,  even  though  representing  a  firm  located  in  another  state. 

'Acts,  1872,  Mar.  7. 


Finances.  187 

was  settled,  the  ingenuity  of  the  legislators  was  taxed  to 
prevent  all  state  income  from  being  paid  in  coupons.  In 
1878  and  1879  most  of  the  rural  public  schools  were  closed. 

In  1879  tne  bondholders  agreed  to  a  reduction  in  the  rate 
of  interest,  whereupon  the  General  Assembly  of  1879  passed 
the  McCulloch  Bill.1  This  act  provided  for  the  issue  of  new 
bonds  which  were  to  be  exchanged  for  outstanding  bonds, 
dollar  for  dollar,  and  were  to  bear  interest  at  3  per  cent,  for 
ten  years,  4  per  cent,  for  twenty  years,  and  5  per  cent,  for 
ten  years,  making  an  average  rate  of  4  per  cent,  for  the 
forty  years.  The  act  further  provided  that  all  due  and 
unpaid  interest  might  be  funded  in  the  new  bonds  at  the 
rate  of  50  cents  on  the  dollar,  and  that  the  coupons  of  these 
new  bonds  should  be  receivable  as  taxes. 

As  a  result  of  this  act  the  interest  was  about  $1,000,000 
annually.  The  charitable  institutions  were  on  the  verge  of 
bankruptcy.  The  jails  of  the  State  were  filled  with  lunatics, 
because  the  asylums  had  become  too  poor  to  receive  them. 
The  campaign  of  1880  was  fought  out  on  these  lines.  The 
extreme  Readjusters  got  control  of  both  houses  and  passed 
the  Riddleberger  Bill.  Governor  Holliday  vetoed  it.  In 
1881  the  Readjusters  pledged  themselves  to  the  Riddleberger 
Bill.  Mahone,  who  controlled  the  negro  vote,  joined  his 
party  to  that  of  Riddleberger,  and  the  combination  carried 
the  State.2 

The  General  Assembly  convened  in  January,  1882,  and 
passed  two  preliminary  bills  known  as  "  coupon  killers,"3 
the  purpose  of  which  was  to  make  the  McCulloch  Bill  inef- 
fectual by  refusing  to  redeem  the  coupons,  and  thereby 
forcing  the  bondholders  to  accept  the  conditions  to  be  laid 
down  in  the  new  Riddleberger  Bill.4  This  Riddleberger  Act 
repudiated  interest  which  had  accumulated  during  the  war 
period,  thereby  scaling  the  debt  about  one  third.  The  $21,- 

'Acts,  1879,  c.  24. 

a  Both  senators,  Mahone  and  Riddleberger,  became  Republicans. 

3  Acts,  1881-82,  pp.  10,  37. 

'Acts,  1881-82,  c.  84. 


1  88  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 


1  which  it  assumed  was  to  bear  interest  at  3  per  cent. 
instead  of  4  per  cent.,  and  coupons  were  not  to  be  received 
as  taxes. 

In  1885  the  Democrats  were  back  in  power;  but  they  were 
returned  on  a  platform  accepting  the  results  of  the  Riddle- 
berger  Act.  Under  this  act  only  about  $9,000,000  was 
funded  between  1882  and  1892,  on  which  interest  was 
promptly  paid.  The  General  Assembly  hedged  the  court 
decisions  against  the  "  coupon  killer  acts  "  so  effectually 
that  the  amount  of  coupons  received  as  taxes  fell  from 
$1,077,299  in  1880  to  $214,580  in  1889,  and  the  bondholders 
were  about  ready  to  compromise.  In  1890  the  General  As- 
sembly appointed  a  commission  to  meet  a  committee  of  the 
bondholders.  Most  of  the  bonds  were  held  in  England,  but 
New  York  representatives  negotiated;  and  in  1892  a  final 
settlement  of  the  debt  resulted.2 

The  act  making  this  settlement  provided  first,  that  the 
$9,000,000  funded  under  the  Riddleberger  Act  need  not  be 
refunded;  second,  that  the  variety  of  original  bonds,  or 
bonds  which  had  been  funded  under  any  funding  act  pre- 
vious to  1882  (which,  including  interest,  aggregated  about 
$28,000,000),  might  be  collected  by  the  bondholders'  com- 
mittee, and  in  exchange  for  this  $28,000,000  the  State  would 
issue  $19,000,000  of  bonds;  third,  that  this  $19,000,000 
should  be  distributed  among  the  claimants  of  the  $28,000,000 
in  such  proportions  as  the  bondholders  would  agree  to; 
fourth,  that  any  bonds  not  exchanged  by  this  committee3 
should  be  exchanged  by  the  state  commissioners  at  the  ratio 
of  19  new  for  28  old,  and  that  the  respective  value  of  these 
different  classes  of  bonds  should  be  the  same  as  that  recog- 
nized by  the  committee  for  the  bondholders;  fifth,  that  on 
these  new  bonds  2  per  cent,  should  be  paid  for  ten  years, 
and  3  per  cent,  for  ninety  years;  sixth,  that  from  1910  until 
1929  a  sinking  fund  of  one  half  of  one  per  cent,  of  the 

1  The  exact  amount  was  $21,035,377. 
1  Acts,  1891-92,  c.  325. 

8  The  committee  guaranteed  to  hand  over  bonds  to  the  aggregate 
amount  of  $23,000,000. 


Finances.  1 89 

whole  debt  should  be  annually  invested  in  bonds,  to  be  can- 
celled; thereafter,  one  per  cent,  of  the  amount  of  the  debt 
existing  in  1830  should  be  retired  annually.  The  terms  of 
this  settlement  of  1892  have  been  strictly  complied  with. 

From  time  to  time  all  the  stocks  held  by  the  State  have 
been  disposed  of,1  except  an  insignificant  amount  in  turn- 
pike companies  which  paid  $286  in  dividends  in  1910, 
and  5849  shares  of  stock  in  the  Richmond,  Fredericksburg, 
and  Potomac  Railroad  Company  which  paid  $52,641  in  divi- 
dends the  same  year.2  The  policy  of  the  State  has  been  to 
sell  its  assets  and  invest  the  proceeds  in  the  state  bonds 
which  are  cancelled.3  Virginia's  entire  debt,  October  I, 

1  Most  of  these  stocks  were  disposed  of  at  very  low  figures.  Often 
indirect  motives  prompted  the  sale.  For  example,  in  1870  it  was 
feared  that  the  branches  of  railroads  in  the  State  would  be  so  con- 
solidated as  to  become  feeders  to  Baltimore  from  Danville  through 
the  Piedmont  region,  and  from  Bristol  through  the  Valley  of  Vir- 
ginia. At  least,  by  so  arguing,  Mahone  had  the  Consolidation  Bill 
passed  which  consolidated  the  three  branches  now  forming  the  Nor- 
folk and  Western  Railroad  from  Bristol  to  Norfolk.  In  1870  the 
State's  stock  in  these  branches  was  estimated  by  the  second  auditor 
to  be  worth  $5,524,841.  By  this  Consolidation  Bill  the  State  allowed 
the  consolidated  road  to  issue  $15,000,000  of  first  mortgage  bonds 
and  herself  accepted  $4,000,000  of  second  class  stock.  All  the  State 
ever  realized  from  this  was  $500,000  in  1882,  which  the  Readjusters 
used  for  schools  (Senate  Journal,  1883-84,  Doc.  No.  n).  See  The 
Readjuster  Movement  in  Virginia,  now  being  written  by  C.  C. 
Pearson. 

3  When  the  R.  F.  and  P.  R.  R.  Company  was  chartered  by  an  act 
of  the  General  Assembly,  February  25,  1834,  the  State  subscribed 
for  and  became  owner  of  2752  shares  of  stock,  for  which  it  paid 
$275,200.  By  1881  a  "  considerable  surplus  had  accumulated  for  the 
company.  Instead  of  being  distributed,  this  sum  was  reinvested  and 
dividend  obligation  script  was  issued  to  the  stockholders."  This 
bears  the  same  dividends  and  is  on  the  same  footing  as  the  regular 
stock  except  that  it  is  without  voting  power.  The  State's  share  was 
$172,700.  In  1907  additional  surplus  was  distributed,  of  which  the 
State's  share  was  $117,000;  hence  the  State  now  holds  stock  or  this 
script  equivalent  to  the  par  value  of  $584,900,  which  in  1910  paid  9 
per  cent,  dividends,  or  $52,647.  Because  of  this  good  investment  an 
act  was  passed,  May  21,  1903  (c.  II,  sec.  12),  which  prohibited  any 
other  road  from  paralleling  this  road,  but  this  prohibition  was  re- 
pealed by  chapter  34  of  the  acts  for  1908.  See  House  Journal,  1908, 
Doc.  No.  5,  for  history  of  this  investment. 

"Since  the  war,  bonds  to  the  par  value  of  $11,411,191  have  been 
cancelled  by  the  commissioners  of  the  sinking  fund ;  and  thirty-odd 
millions  have  been  paid  in  interest. 


190  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

1910,  was  $25,380,400,  on  which  $820,496  interest  was  paid.1 
Each  year  the  State  retires  bonds  to  the  extent  of  one  half 
of  one  per  cent,  of  the  principal  ($120,000  in  1910)  ;  plus 
the  dividends  from  the  Richmond,  Fredericksburg,  and 
Potomac  Railroad  Company  ($52,641  in  1910)  ;  plus  a  sum 
coming  to  the  sinking  fund  from  the  general  fund  as  interest 
on  bonds  which  the  sinking  fund  commissioners  have  already 
retired  and  cancelled  ($18,582)  ;  plus  dividends  from  the 
Berryville  Turnpike  ($286  in  1910)  ;  plus  fees  for  inter- 
change of  bonds  ($152.50  in  1910)  ;  or  a  total  of  $191,661.50 
for  1910. 

In  1894  a  commission  was  appointed  by  Virginia  to  bring 
about  a  settlement  with  West  Virginia.  In  1900  the  offer 
was  renewed.  In  1905,  when  the  commission  visited 
Charleston  to  urge  a  settlement,  the  legislature  of  West 
Virginia  passed  the  following  resolution :  "  Resolved  by  the 
legislature  of  West  Virginia,  That  it  is  the  sense  of  the 
legislature  that  the  State  of  West  Virginia  does  not  owe  any 
part  of  the  so-called  debt  of  Virginia,  and  that  this  legis- 
lature is  opposed  to  any  negotiations  whatever  on  that 
subject." 

In  the  meantime  Brown  Brothers  and  Company  of  New 
York  had  collected  into  their  control  the  greater  part  of  the 
West  Virginia  certificates.2  They  agreed  to  abide  by  any 
settlement  Virginia  might  make,  and  in  1906  a  suit  was 
brought  in  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  by  the 
Commonwealth  of  Virginia  against  the  State  of  West 
Virginia.3  West  Virginia  claimed  that  the  greater  part  of 
the  debt  was  contracted  for  public  works  built  within  Old 
Virginia,  and  that  the  new  State  should  pay  only  such  part 
of  the  debt  as  was  spent  within  West  Virginia.  Virginia 
answered  that  the  works,  though  built  within  Virginia,  were 

1  No  funds  were  in  the  sinking  fund. 

2  In  1905  they  held  $12,910,555;  and  in  1910  the  Virginia  sinking 
fund  held  $2,026,439,  the  Literary  Fund,  $719,022. 

*Of  course,  individuals  could  not  sue  the  State  of  West  Virginia; 
nor  could  Virginia  have  sued  for  them  as  agent;  but  Virginia  had 
a  contractual  interest  as  a  result  of  West  Virginia's  constitutional 
assumption  of  a  portion  of  the  debt. 


Finances.  191 

intended  to  develop  the  timber  and  coal  resources  of  the 
western  part  of  Virginia,  and  that  the  measure  providing 
the  revenue  could  not  have  been  carried  in  the  General  As- 
sembly without  the  votes  of  delegates  from  the  section  now 
composing  West  Virginia. 

The  court  apportioned  the  debt  on  the  basis  of  property 
values  in  1861,  excluding  slaves.  This  made  West  Vir- 
ginia's portion  of  principal  in  1861  $7,182,507,  instead  of 
about  $11,000,000,  as  was  claimed  by  Virginia.  The  ques- 
tion of  interest  since  1861  was  not  decided,  the  court  advis- 
ing the  parties  to  settle  this  question  by  a  conference.  In 
case  they  cannot  come  to  an  agreement  the  court  may  be 
again  appealed  to.  The  final  amount,  whatever  it  is,  will 
be  paid  over  to  the  certificate  owners  by  Virginia.  The 
State  of  Virginia  may  profit  by  the  settlement  to  the  extent 
of  something  less  than  $1,000,000.  That  is,  the  certificates 
resulting  from  the  state  stocks  which  accrued  to  the  Sink- 
ing Fund  since  1861  should  come  in  for  their  share  of  the 
$7,182,507  plus  whatever  insterest  may  be  allowed.  The 
certificates  held  by  the  Literary  Fund  accrued  from  state 
stocks  held  previous  to  1861,  and  it  is  not  likely  that  these 
will  come  in  for  any  portion. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

CENTRALIZING  TENDENCIES  AND  NEEDS. 

Departments. — No  form  of  state  government  is  absolutely 
good  or  absolutely  bad.  When  Virginia  declared  her  inde- 
pendence of  England,  hereditary  monarchs  of  centralized 
states  were,  as  a  rule,  oppressive  and  inefficient.  Therefore 
such  expressions  as  "personal  liberty"  or  "local  self-gov- 
ernment" became  popular  shibboleths  of  reform  parties. 
Personal  liberty  in  some  respects  was  unduly  hampered,  and 
centralized  authority  in  the  hands  of  an  inefficient  or  corrupt 
monarch  or  court  party  was  oppressive.  Virginia  went  to 
the  other  extreme  by  providing  for  an  extremely  decen- 
tralized administration.  Her  executive  was  given  very 
limited  administrative  powers ;  but  the  officers  of  small  coun- 
ties were  given  most  of  the  administrative  functions 
essential  to  a  civilized  state  of  that  time.  How  did  the  ex- 
treme "  personal  liberty "  and  "  local  self-government " 
tendencies  of  that  period  work  out  in  practice  ? 

With  regard  to  education,  the  wealthy  had  the  "  personal 
liberty"  to  employ  a  private  tutor  or  governess  for  their 
children,  and  to  pay  the  tuition  of  a  preparatory  school  or 
college.1  Those  without  means  had  not  this  liberty ;  and  as 
a  result  Virginia,  which  ranked  sixth  in  wealth,  had  a  greater 
percentage  of  white  illiterates  in  1860  than  twenty-six  other 
states  which  had  more  or  less  centralized  public  school  sys- 
tems.2 For  nearly  a  century  the  "  local  self-government " 
counties  made  desultory  attempts  to  establish  county  public 
school  systems,  but  practically  all  that  was  accomplished  was 

1  In   1860  Virginia  ranked  first  in  the  total  income  of  colleges, 
including  tuition,  though  she  ranked  fifth  in  total  population,  and 
thirteenth  in  white  population  (Eighth  Census  of  the  United  States, 
Vol.  IV,  p.  505). 

2  Report  of  the  Commissioner  of  Education,  1870,  p.  478. 

192 


Centralizing  Tendencies  and  Needs.  193 

the    distribution    of    the    central    Literary    Fund   to   poor 
children. 

From  the  time  that  the  public  school  system  was  estab- 
lished, in  1870,  until  1905  district  officers  performed  the  * 
functions  of  building  school-houses ;  and  during  the  thirty- 
five  years  the  total  value  of  school-houses  had  increased  to 
only  $4,000,000.  From  1905  until  1910,  under  an  effort  by 
the  central  department,  with  no  cost  to  the  State,  the  value 
increased  from  $4,000,000  to  $8,000,000. 

Though  the  administration  of  the  central  penitentiary  has 
not  been  the  best,  it  has  been  far  superior  to  that  of  the 
county  jails.  The  penitentiary  has  become  practically  self- 
sustaining,  while  no  county  jail  has  approached  this.  The 
change  from  local  sheriffs  to  central  penitentiary  guards  to 
convey  convicts  to  the  penitentiary  reduced  the  cost  one 
half. 

Because  of  lack  of  funds  there  is  much  room  for  improve- 
ment in  the  state  hospitals  for  the  insane,  yet  how  in- 
finitely better  are  they  administered  than  the  county  alms- 
houses.  And,  as  occurred  in  the  case  of  convicts,  the  cost 
of  conveying  insane  patients  fell  off  one  half  when  state 
guards  superseded  county  guards. 

Not  until  within  the  last  four  years,  when  the  office  of 
state  road  commissioner  was  created  and  the  counties  were 
compelled  to  build  good  roads,  by  a  form  of  conditional 
return  of  taxes,  did  the  counties  build  permanent  first-class 
roads. 

County  health  boards  have  existed  for  years,  but  not  until 
the  state  commissioner  was  appointed  four  years  ago  was 
any  serious  work  done  in  the  way  of  sanitary  precautions, 
excepting  a  limited  amount  in  cities.  In  the  single  item  of 
diphtheria  antitoxin  this  new  health  department  saved  the 
State  $15,000  in  1910  by  purchasing  the  large  supply  at 
$15,000  less  than  it  would  have  cost  the  local  health  boards 
or  druggists. 

In  agriculture  is  seen  a  most  striking  example  of  the 
greater  efficiency  of  centralization.  Before  the  Civil  War 

13 


194  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

no  legislation  was  enacted  directly  affecting  the  farmer. 
Let  us  follow  one  line  of  legislation  since  the  war — fertilizer 
inspection.  The  first  provision,  that  all  fertilizers  should 
have  the  ingredients  stamped  upon  the  packages,  gave  the 
farmer  the  "  personal  liberty  "  of  bringing  action  against  the 
manufacturer  who  mislabeled  his  fertilizers;  but  the  farmer 
did  not  know  where  to  have  the  fertilizer  analyzed,  even  if 
he  had  been  willing  to  bear  the  expense  and  trouble.  Next, 
the  State  provided  a  chemist,  though  the  farmer  had  to  pay 
him  fees.  Finally  the  state  chemist  analyzed  it  free  for 
farmers.  But  still  the  farmer  did  not  avail  himself  of  this 
"  personal  liberty."  The  farmers  of  the  State  continued  to 
lose  not  less  than  $1,000,000  annually,  and  probably  much 
more,  until  the  central  department  sent  out  inspectors  to 
see  that  the  farmers  were  not  deluded  into  the  purchase  of 
fertilizers  with  high-sounding  names. 

Until  the  state  corporation  commission  was  created  in 
1902  with  strong  legislative,  judicial,  and  executive  powers, 
the  railroads  had  never  been  coped  with,  to  say  nothing  of 
insurance  companies  and  banks. 

The  assessment  of  taxes  has  always  been  mainly  local; 
and  to  have  the  tax  payer  compare  this  branch  of  local 
administration  with  the  work  of  the  state  corporation  com- 
mission which  assesses  railroads,  mineral  lands,  and  timber 
lands  is  to  convince  him  that  he  need  not  fear  a  state  tax 
commission  because  it  would  be  adding  authority  to  the 
central  state  government. 

A  realization  of  the  greater  efficiency  that  central  state 
departments  have  over  county  officers  who  devote  only  a 
portion  of  their  time  to  public  duties  has,  during  the  past 
decade,  caused  the  people  to  delegate  all  new  functions,  and 
some  old  ones,  to  state  departments  or  commissions  instead 
of  to  county  officers.  This  increase  of  state  functions  needs 
to  be  coordinated,  needs  a  head ;  and  this  head  should  be  the 
governor. 

The  Governor. — When  Virginia  gained  her  independence 
of  England,  the  doctrine  of  the  separation  of  powers  was 


Centralising  Tendencies  and  Needs.  195 

in  its  prime.  The  governor,  as  the  executive  side  of  the 
triune  government,  was  granted  no  legislative  functions; 
several  judicial  functions;  and  even  purely  executive  or 
administrative  functions  were  delegated  sparingly  to  him. 
By  the  constitution  of  1869  he  was  given  the  legislative 
function  of  vetoing  bills  passed  by  the  General  Assembly; 
and  the  constitution  of  1902  extended  this  to  any  particular 
item  or  items  of  appropriation  bills.  His  judicial  functions, 
for  example  the  pardoning  power,  have  not  been  materially 
changed,  though  it  has  been  decided  that  he  can  pardon  con- 
ditionally as  well  as  grant  a  complete  pardon.  His  execu- 
tive powers  have  shown  some  increase. 

The  governor  has  always  had  authority  to  suspend  the 
departmental  officers  at  the  seat  of  government  for  "  mis- 
behavior, incapacity,  neglect  of  official  duty,  or  acts  per- 
formed without  due  authority  of  law."  And  since  1887  he 
has  had  power  to  suspend  a  county  or  city  treasurer.  But 
from  the  Civil  War  until  the  Constitutional  Convention  of 
1902  he  did  not  have  any  important  appointments  to  make, 
except  that  he  appointed  about  two  hundred  members  of 
boards,  who  in  turn  appointed  administrative  heads  of  the 
institutions  which  they  controlled.  But  of  the  ten  new  re- 
munerative state  offices  created  by  the  Constitutional  Con- 
vention in  1902  or  since  that  time,  nine  are  filled  by  the 
governor;  among  these  appointees  are  three  state  corpora- 
tion commissioners,  who  are  scarcely  second  in  importance 
to  the  members  of  the  court  of  appeals.  This  shows  a 
strong  tendency  toward  placing  the  appointive  power  in  the 
hands  of  the  governor.1 

1  State  officers  and  boards  are  selected  as  follows : 
Elected  by  the  people : 

Governor. 

Lieutenant  Governor. 

Attorney-General. 

Secretary  of  the  Commonwealth. 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 

Commissioner  of  Agriculture. 

State  Treasurer. 
Elected  by  the  General  Assembly : 

Auditor  of  Public  Accounts. 

Second  Auditor. 


196  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

The  primary  duties  of  a  governor  are  commonly  believed 
to  be,  and  should  be,  the  enforcement  of  the  laws  of  the 
State.  Yet  under  the  present  decentralized  system  of  ad- 
ministration in  Virginia  the  governor  has  little  adminstra- 
tive  power.  If  a  local  saloon-elected  justice  of  the  peace 
decides  a  case  against  the  State,  and  clearly  against  the  law. 
there  is  no  appeal  to  a  higher  court,  and  the  governor  has 
no  means  by  which  to  enforce  the  law  in  that  locality.1  If 
the  justice  of  the  peace  send  a  case  to  the  grand  jury,  but 
the  county-elected  commonwealth-attorney  allow  the  case 
to  drop,  the  governor  is  helpless.  And  if  the  grand  jury 
have  an  accused  person  confined  in  a  jail  awaiting  trial  by 

Register  of  the  Land  Office. 

Superintendent  of  Public  Printing. 

Commissioner  of  Insurance. 

Elected  by  the  General  Assembly,  but  nominated  by  boards  of  state 
schools : 

State  Board  of  Education. 
Appointed  by  the  Governor: 

Adjutant  General. 

.State  Corporation  Commissioners  (three). 

Commissioner  of  Labor. 
'Commissioner  of  State  Hospitals. 

.State  Highway  Commissioner. 

Health  Commissioner. 

'Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner. 

Secretary  of  Virginia  Military  Records. 

Military  Staff. 

Board  of  Accountancy  (five). 

Visitors  for  eleven  state  schools  (ninety-four). 

Boards  of  Examiners  for  pharmacists,  dentists,  graduate  nurses, 
veterinarians,  embalmers,  lawyers   (forty-six). 

Board  of  Charities  and  Corrections  (five). 

Board  of  Agriculture  and  Immigration  (eleven). 

Penitentiary  Board  (five). 

Board  of  Fisheries. 

Directors  for  five  hospitals  for  the  insane  (fifteen). 

Board  of  Health  (twelve). 

Notaries  Public  (numerous). 

1  This  was  illustrated  by  book -making  at  the  Jamestown  races.  A 
local  justice  of  the  peace  decided  that  the  gambling  was  not  con- 
trary to  the  state  law,  though  it  was  clearly  so.  The  governor  was 
powerless  against  the  justice  of  the  peace,  though  he  has  directed 
the  attorney-general  to  revoke  the  charter  of  the  corporation  which 
permits  this  gambling.  It  seems  that  no  harm  could  result  if  the 
governor  could  demand  an  appeal,  on  the  part  of  the  State,  direct 
to  the  supreme  court  of  appeals.  Of  course  he  would  seldom  make 
use  of  this  right,  but  where  one  locality  is  violating  a  law  in  a 
manner  which  effects  surrounding  portions  of  the  State,  redress 
should  be  had  somewhere. 


Centralising  Tendencies  and  Needs.  197 

a  petit  jury,  and  there  is  reason  to  believe  that  the  county- 
elected  sheriff  will  allow  him  to  be  lynched,  the  governor 
must  be  very  cautious  in  warning  the  sheriff,  lest  he  receive 
the  reply  that  it  is  none  of  his  business.  Yet  the  governor 
is  expected  to  see  that  the  laws  are  faithfully  executed. 

The  governor  of  Virginia  is  not  at  the  head  of  a  system. 
He  works  with  department  heads  who  may  be  subordinate  or 
insubordinate,  -as  they  like.  The  idea  of  the  division  of 
powers  would  have  broken  down  long  ago  but  for  two  rea- 
sons ;  first,  because  people  have  been  willing  to  put  up  with 
inefficiency;  second,  the  three  branches  have  been  coordi- 
nated by  a  political  boss  or  political  clique,  self-made,  who 
rise  above  the  three  branches  of  government.  Even  if  the 
governor  be  given  great  power,  the  political  boss  or  clique, 
as  the  case  may  be,  will  still  endeavor  to  elect  him ;  but  when 
he  has  powers  and  does  not  exert  them,  the  people  can 
know  why,  and  there  would  no  longer  be  excuse  for  in- 
efficiency. An  inefficient  or  corrupt  governor,  if  not  im- 
peached sooner,  is  out  of  office  in  four  years ;  but  a  hundred 
intangible  leaks  run  forever. 

It  is  no  longer  a  question  of  centralized  state  government 
or  decentralized  state  government;  it  is  a  question  of  cen- 
tralized state  government  or  more  centralized  national  gov- 
ernment. People  want  efficiency,  and  if  the  State  will  not 
give  it,  they  want  it  from  the  National  Government.  Not 
long  since,  Mr.  Root,  then  secretary  of  state,  doubtless  upon 
the  initiative  of  his  chief,  stated  publicly  that  unless  the 
States  perform  more  satisfactorily  the  duties  allotted  them 
in  the  scheme  of  our  government,  means  will  be  found,  by 
construction  of  the  Federal  Constitution,  to  take  from  them 
and  confer  upon  the  general  government  the  control  of  such 
subjects  (now  admitted  to  be  reserved  to  the  States)  as 
touch  upon  the  common  interests  of  the  American  people. 
Mr.  Raleigh  C.  Minor,  of  the  University  of  Virginia  Law 
School,  in  a  paper  read  before  the  1910  meeting  of  the 
Virginia  Bar  Association,  concludes  that  the  only  hope  for 
the  States  is  in  greater  efficiency;  and  that  the  only  means 


198  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia. 

of  greater   efficiency   is  by   centralizing  administration   in 
the  governor. 

There  seems  to  be  no  sufficient  reason  why  the  adminis- 
trative department  of  the  state  government  should  not  be 
fashioned  according  to  the  system  of  the  general  govern- 
ment. Then  the  governor  would  appoint  heads  of  all  de- 
partments. For  example,  he  would  appoint  for  his  cabinet 
the  secretary  of  the  Commonwealth,  state  auditor,  attorney- 
general,  superintendent  of  public  instruction,  commissioner 
of  agriculture,  commissioner  of  health,  and  perhaps  one  or 
two  additional  commissioners.  These  would  be  directly  re- 
sponsible to  the  governor ;  but  they  would  appoint  heads  of 
bureaus  who  in  turn  would  appoint  their  subordinates.  To 
give  one  example,  the  department  of  agriculture  would  ap- 
pear somewhat  as  follows : 

A.  Bureau  of  Experimentation,  with  state  experimenter 

appointed  by  the  commissioner. 

1.  Central  Experiment  Station. 

2.  District  Experiment  Stations. 

3.  High  School  Experiment  Plots. 

4.  Demonstration  Extension  Work. 

5.  Boys'  Corn  Clubs. 

B.  Bureau  of  Teaching,  with  president  of  Agricultural  Col- 

lege appointed  by  the  commissioner. 

1.  College. 

2.  Movable  Schools  of  Agriculture. 

3.  Farmers'  Institutes. 

4.  Agricultural  Departments  of  High  Schools. 

5.  Immigration. 

C.  Bureau   of   Police    (Inspection),   with   state   inspector 

appointed  by  the  commissioner. 

1.  Fertilizer  Inspection. 

2.  Seed  Inspection. 

3.  Food  and  Feed  Inspection. 

4.  Dairy  Inspection. 

5.  Live  Stock  Inspection. 

6.  Nursery  and  Orchard  Inspection. 


Centralizing  Tendencies  and  Needs.  199 

Conclusions. — The  summarized  ideas  of  the  writer  regard- 
ing the  organization  of  the  state  departments  into  a  system 
of  individual  responsibility,  with  the  governor  at  the  head 
of  the  system,  are  found  already  expressed  as  follows  r1 

"  i.  The  Governor  should  appoint,  and  be  responsible  for 
all  executive  subordinates. 

"2.  Each  separate  office,  or  department,  should  be  man- 
aged by  one  man. 

"  3.  Each  responsible  officer  should  be  a  permanent  expert, 
paid  by  an  adequate  salary,  not  by  fees. 

"4.  The  various  departments  should  be  organized  sys- 
tematically, so  that  the  responsibility  of  each  is  made  exclu- 
sive, definite,  and  tangible." 

To  complete  this  system  by  which  greater  efficiency  is 
made  possible,  the  head  of  each  department  should  have  the 
right  to  address  either  branch  of  the  General  Assembly 
upon  matters  relating  to  his  department.  And  each  branch 
of  the  General  Assembly  should  have  the  corresponding 
right  to  compel  the  head  of  a  department  to  attend,  and  to 
answer  questions.2  This  reciprocal  privilege  would  both 
give  the  departmental  head  an  opportunity  to  make  his 
needs  known  more  clearly  than  he  can  possibly  do  in  a 
report,  and  would  give  the  legislators  an  opportunity  to 
bring  to  light  any  loose  or  corrupt  practices. 

1  H.  B.  Heneway  summarized  these  principles  of  individual  respon- 
sibility,  organized  into  a  system  of  government,  in  an  article  on 
"  The  Organization  of  the  State  Executive  in  Illinois,"  in  Illinois 
Law  Review,  June,  1911. 

"  This  cabinet  idea  is  advocated  by  ex-Governor  Montague  in  an 
address  delivered  at  the  meeting  of  the  Pennsylvania  Bar  Associa- 
tion, June,  1911. 


INDEX 


Accountant,  special,  166. 

Agriculture,  department  of,  129- 
130,  140,  142-146;  commis- 
sioner of,  129-141,  165;  state 
board  of,  122,  130,  132,  137, 
'  165;  movable  schools  of,  139; 
united  board  of,  144. 

Alderman,  E.  A.,  24,  64, 

Alexandria  County,  school  board 
of,  33J  taxes  in,  169. 

Allegheny  County,  41. 

Almshouses,  county,  95,  99. 

Amherst  County,  170. 

Animals,  protection  of  domestic, 

136-137- 
Apportionment  of  school  funds, 

by  the  State,  48,  25  (table  and 

note)  ;  by  the  county,  50-51 ; 

for  high  schools,  54;  proposed 

method  of,  54. 
Auditor  of  public  accounts,  163- 

166,  12,  15,  48,  83,  85,  136,  141, 

160,161,  173,  175,  176,  179  182. 
Auditing  committee  166. 
Augusta  County,  37. 
Australian    Ballot    Law,   83-86; 

in  primaries,  87;  in  elections, 

89. 

Ballots,  83,  84,  85,  89. 
Banks,      control      of,      161-162; 

taxation  of,  179-180. 
Berkeley,  Sir  Wm.,  61. 
Blair,  Rev.  James,  61. 
Boards    of    visitors    for    state 

schools,  22,  46,  47,  196  (note). 
"Bourbons,"  29,  58. 
Boys'  corn  clubs,  140. 
Braxton,  A.  C,  150  (note),  156. 
Bribery,  81    (note),   85    (note), 

86   (note). 

Buchanan  County,  169. 
Byrd,  R.  E.,  43. 
Candidates  for  office,  84,  86,  87, 

88,90. 
Capitation  tax,    180-182,  47,  49, 

50,  78-79,  80,  82-83,  go,  91. 
Catawba   Sanatorium,   126. 
Charities  and  corrections,  board 


of,  116-117;  secretary  of,  115, 
116. 

Citizens'  school  associations,  24. 

City,  schools  in,  20,  21,  29,  34, 
35,  41,  50;  taxation  in,  167 
(note),  175  (note),  176,  180, 
181. 

City  superintendents  of  schools. 
See  division  superintendents. 

Clerk  of  the  state  board  of  edu- 
cation, 27,  39.  See  also  Secre- 
tary of  state  board  of  educa- 
tion. 

Clerks  of  election,  82,  83,  84. 

Commissioner  of  hospitals  for 
the  insane,  96,  98,  100,  196 
(note). 

Commissioners  of  the  revenue, 
118,  167,  168,  173,  176,  179,  180, 
182. 

Compulsory  education,  40-42,  51, 

55- 

Conditional  aid,  for  high  schools, 
38,  39,  42,  50,  53-54,  76;  for 
•  districts,  51 ;  based  on  attend- 
ance, 54-55;  from  Peabody 
Fund,  56. 

Consolidation  of  schools,  37. 

Constitution  of  1902,  20,  21,  22, 
23,  25,  30,  40,  44,  45,  46,  49,  50, 
74,  79,  82  (note),  84  (and 
note),  88  (note),  97,  107,  in, 
150  (and  note),  157,  167,  175, 
176,  178,  180,  195. 

Conventions,  party,  86,  87,  89 
(note). 

Convict  road  force,  112-115. 

Cooperative  Education  Commis- 
sion, Virginia,  24,  25. 

Corporation  commission,  state, 
•  150-162,  165,  176,  194,  196 
(note). 

Corrupt  practices  act,  86. 

Counties,  area  of,  30  (note) ; 
composition  of  population  of, 
79;  primaries  in,  89,  90;  taxa- 
tion in,  169-170,  175,  180,  181; 
school  boards  of,  18,  49,  50,  51. 


200 


Index, 


201 


County  board  of  supervisors,  35, 
50,  119,  135,  137,  168,  175,  176. 

County  school  trustee  electoral 
boards,  19,  47. 

County  superintendents  of 
schools,  see  Division  superin- 
tendents. 

Crop  pest  commissioners,  state 
board  of,  135. 

Dabney,  C.  W.,  23  (note). 

Dairy  and  food  commissioner, 
141. 

Daniel,  J.  W.,  150  (note),  156. 

Dashiell,  Mrs.,  28. 

Debt,  state,  183-191;  public,  48; 
effect  of,  upon  borrowing,  49. 

Democrats,  15,  46,  47,  58,  79,  85, 
87,  88,  89  (and  note),  92,  97, 
167,  188. 

Demonstrator,  agricultural,  139- 
140;  county,  140  (and  note). 

Dental  association,  120. 

Dentistry,  board  of,  120,  196 
(note). 

Division  superintendents,  29-35, 
17,  18,  19,  20,  21,  22,  24,  26,  27, 
28,  42,  44,  47,  50,  62. 

Drewry,  W.  F.,  102. 

Education,  state  board  of,  25-26, 
17-22,  27,  31,  33,  34,  43,  45,  46, 
47  (note),  51,  52,  53,  54,  68, 
115  (note). 

Educational  commission,  Vir- 
ginia, 56,  76-77- 

Educational  Conference,  Vir- 
ginia, 25. 

Educational  test  for  suffrage, 
80-81,  91. 

Eggleston,  J.  D.,  25,  26,  27,  39, 

43,  59- 

Elections,  83-86. 

Electoral  boards,  county  school 
trustee,  19.  47 ;  county  or  city 
political,  82,  83,  84,  85. 

Electorate,  78-83,  85,  90. 

Electrocution,     at     penitentiary, 

109. 

Emory  and  Henry  College,  14. 

Embalmers,  board  of,  120. 

Entomologist,  state,  135,  136. 

Epileptic  Colony,  95-96. 

Examinations  of  teachers.  18. 

Experiment  stations,  state  agri- 
cultural, 138,  135,  136,  137. 

Farmers'  institutes,  140. 


Farmville  State  Normal  School, 

49750,  56,  70,  72. 
Fertilizer     inspection,     130-134, 

194. 

Finances,  and  schools,  47-57. 

Floyd  County,  169. 

Frazer,  Robert,  23. 

Fredericksburg,  36. 

Fredericksburg  Normal  and  In- 
dustrial School,  71,  72. 

Freedman's  Bureau,  95. 

General  Education  Board,  23 
(and  note). 

Governor,  194-200,  12,  17,  22, 
48,  59,  74,  78  (note),  85,  88, 

89,   105,    IO9,   IIO,   115,   I2O,   ISO, 

159,  163,  164,  168,  169. 

Graduate  nurses,  board  of  ex- 
aminers of,  120. 

"  Grandfather  clause,"  80,  89. 

Grayson  County,  169,  181. 

Greene  County,  170. 

Halifax  County,  169. 

Hampton  Normal  and  Industrial 
Institute,  56,  68. 

Harrisonburg,  36. 

Harrisonburg  Normal  and  In- 
dustrial School,  70-71,  72. 

Health  commissioner,  state,  122, 
123,  193- 

Health,  state  board  of,  119-122, 
51,  126,  127;  county  board  of, 
119,  125;  department  of,  122- 
128,  193. 

Henrico  County.  169. 

High  schools,  38-40 ;  agricultural 
departments  in,  38;  normal 
training  departments  in,  39; 
text-books  for,  43,  44;  condi- 
tional aid  for,  50;  growth  of, 
53;  teachers  for,  71. 

Highway  commissioner,  112,  113, 

114,  193- 

Holliday,  Gov.,  187.  _ 

Hospitals  for  the  insane,  48; 
growth  of,  95-97;  control  of, 
97-98;  commitment  to.  08-100; 
management  of,  96,  98,  100- 
102,  193 ;  treatment  in,  96,  102- 
103;  at  Wiriamsburg,  95,  97 
(note),  loo-ioi ;  at  Staunton, 
91?.  97  (no^e),  ion-mi ;  at 
Petersburg,  95,  97  (note),  98, 
loo,  101-102;  at  Marion,  95, 
97  (note),  100;  near  Lynch- 


202 


Index. 


burg,   95 ;   conveyance   of   pa- 
tients to,  105. 
Immigration,  137-138. 
Income  tax,  171-173. 
Insane    asylums,    95.      See   also 

Hospitals  for  the  insane. 
Inspector    of    high    schools,    23 

(note). 
Insurance,   bureau   of,    159-161 ; 

commissioner  of,   159-160. 
Internal  improvements,  147,  163, 

184. 

Jacobs,  J.  J.,  184-185. 
Jefferson,  Thomas,  II,  61,  62,  63, 

64,  78,  103. 

Judges  of  election,  82,  83,  84,  89. 
Keezel,  G.  B.,  33. 
Kindergartens,   teachers   trained 

for,  70. 

King  George  County,  138. 
Koiner,  G.  W.,  137. 
Land  assessor,  167,  168. 
Laurel  School,  115,  165. 
Lee  County,  85   (note). 
Lee,  Robert  E.,  16,  26. 
Libraries,    44-46;    state,    44-46; 

circulating,  45,  123 ;  law,  46. 
Librarian,  state,  44,  45. 
Library  board,  45. 
Lime,  inspection  of,  134. 
Liquor  tax,  182-183. 
Literary  Fund,  12-15,  17,  18,  21, 

47,  50,  53,  62,  63,  163. 
Loan  funds,  for  students,  74. 
Local  option  elections,  for  school 

matters,  18,  41,  48;  for  liquor 

licenses,  79,  93,  94  (and  note)  ; 

who  may  vote  in,  81  (note). 
Loudoun  County,  169. 
Lynchburg,  41. 
Madison,  James,  63. 
M'ahone,      William,      187,      189 

(note). 

Mann,  W.  H.,  145. 
Manual  training  departments,  54. 
Maphis,  Chas.  G.,  76  (note). 
Mastin,  J.  T.,  116. 
"  May  Campaign,"  24. 
Medical  College  of  Virginia,  73. 
Medical    examiners,    board    of, 

1 20. 
Medical     Society    of    Virginia, 

119,  122. 

Mill  tax,  proposed,  76-77. 
Miller  Fund,  163. 
Minor,  R.  C,  197. 


Mitchell,  S.  C,  24. 

Monroe,  James,  63. 

Montague,  A.  J.,  24,  42,  43,  199 
(note). 

Montana,  43. 

Munford,  Mrs.,  28. 

Negroes,  schools  for,  57-60,  41, 
51,  68,  72,  181  (note)  ;  super- 
visor of  schools  for,  28,  46; 
suffrage  granted  to,  78,  79,  82 
(and  note),  83,  91,  93,  94,  187; 
insanity  among,  95  (note)  ;  in 
penitentiary,  106;  reformatory 
for,  116;  as  plumbers,  121. 

Norfolk  City,  12  (note). 

Norfolk  County,  12,  37,  92,  169. 

Normal  schools,  state,  69-73,  28, 
36;  summer  state,  72. 

Normal  training  departments,  54. 

O'Ferrall,  Chas.  T.,  106. 

Ogden,  R.  G.,  23. 

Patrick  County,  181. 

Payne,  B.  R.,  24;  quoted,  40. 

Peabody  Fund,  55-56,  23,  28. 

Penitentiary,  103-115;  manage- 
ment of,  103-104,  165,  193; 
conveying  of  prisoners  to,  105- 
106;  living  conditions  in,  106- 
108;  tasking  convicts  at,  108; 
electric  chair  in,  109;  employ- 
ment at,  109-112. 

Pensions,  for  school  teachers, 
51-53;  for  Confederate  sol- 
diers, 103  (note). 

Petersburg,  12  (note). 

Pharmacy,  board  of,  120. 

Pittsylvania  County,  169. 

Plumbers,  boards  of,  120. 

Politics  and  the  schools,  46-47. 

Poll  tax,  171.  See  also  Capita- 
tion tax. 

Portsmouth,   169. 

Primary  elections,  26,  86,  87-89, 

90,  91- 

Primary  schools,  n,  14. 

Prison  Association  of  Virginia, 
115,  u6. 

Property  tax,  168-171,  47,  171 
(note). 

Public  free  schools,  n,  12,  16; 
length  of  sessions,  14,  25,  51, 
60 ;  growth  of,  25 ;  legal  defi- 
nition of,  50;  attendance  of, 
restricted,  78  (note) ;  closed, 
49,  187. 


Index. 


203 


Public  school  system,  11-60; 
lack  of,  74. 

Public  works,  board  of,  147-149, 
153,  175- 

Pupils,  enumeration  of,  25,  50 
(tables)  ;  enrollment  of,  25, 
50  (tables)  ;  attendance  of,  25, 
50  (tables). 

Pure  food,  140-142. 

Quarantine  commissioners,  121. 

Radford,  36. 

Radford  Normal  and  Industrial 
School,  71. 

Railroads,  control  of,  148,  149- 
150.  See  also  State  corpora- 
tion commission. 

Railroad  commissioner,  149-150, 

1.05,  153- 

Railroad    tax,    173-179;    exemp- 
tions from,  forfeited,  178. 
Readjusters,  46,   58,   69,   78,  79, 

97,  100,  167,  187,  189  (note). 
Reformatories,       115-116;       for 

negroes,  116. 

Registrars  of  election,  82,  91,  94. 
Registration  of  voters,  81,  82-83, 

91-92,  93. 
Republicans,    15,   46,  47,   78,   79, 

85,  89,  92,  159,  167. 
Richmond,    Fredericksburg,    and 

Potomac  R.  R.,  178-179. 
Riddlebereer,  H.  H.,  187. 
Road  building,  112-115,  193. 
Roanoke  City,  157. 
Rockefeller,  J.  D.,  23. 
Rockingham  County,  41. 
Ruffner,  W.  H.,  16,  19,  26,  30,  q8. 
Rural  consolidated  schools,  54. 
School  boards,  county,  18,  49,  50, 

Si- 
School  census,  18,  25  (table),  60 

(table). 

School  districts,  18,  20,  50,  54,  55. 
School    examiners,    state    board 

of,  27-29,  47. 
School  expenditures,  growth  of, 

57  (table). 
School    funds,   diverted,  48,  49; 

restored,  48,  49. 
School-houses,  13,  15,  21,  53,  54, 

57,   58.    193- 
School  libraries,  46. 
School  sub-districts,  19,  50. 
School  taxes,  47-48.  50,  54,  57. 
School   trustees,    district   boards 

of,   19,  46,  47,  51,  52,  53,  58. 


Scott  County,  85. 

Second  auditor  of  public  ac- 
counts, 163-165,  14,  17,  50,  52, 
68,  195  (note). 

Secretary  of  the  board  of  edu- 
cation, 27,  28,  39. 

Seed  inspection,  136. 

Se'.igman,  Professor  E.  R.  A., 
173- 

Soldiers'  Home,  103. 

Southern  Education  Board,  23 
(and  note),  24. 

State  Farm,  106,  112,  165. 

Stearnes,  R.  C,  23. 

Stone,  Ormond,  24. 

Students'  Loan  Fund,  74. 

Suffrage,  78-83. 

Summer  normals,  72. 

Superintendent  of  public  instruc- 
tion, 26-27,  15,  17,  18,  22,  25, 
28,  43,  44,  46,  72. 

Supervisors.  See  county  board 
of. 

Supervisor  of  colored  schools, 
28,  46. 

Supervisor  of  rural  schools,  28. 
46. 

Swanson,  Claude  A.,  25 ;  quoted, 

55- 
Taxes.     See    Bank,    Capitation, 

Commission,    Income,    Liquor, 

Mill,      Property,      Railroad, 

School. 
Tax  commission,  state,  167-168, 

171,  173- 

Teachers,  number  employed,  25, 
60;  color  of,  60;  examination 
of,  27;  certification  of,  28,  36, 
47 ;  training  of,  39,  42,  44,  47 ; 
emnlryrent  of  relatives  as.  47  ; 
salaries  of,  in  arrears,  49 ;  pen- 
sions for,  51-53 ;  monthly 
salary,  57  (table),  59;  for  high 
schools,  71 ;  drawn  to  other 
states,  73. 

Text-books,  18,  19,  21,  42-44,  58. 

Transportation  of  school  chil- 
dren, 37. 

Treasurer,  state,  163-166;  coun- 
ty, 166. 

Trees,  inspection  of,  134-136. 

Trustees,  district  school,  17,  18, 
19,  35-  36,  46,  47,  51,  52. 

Tucker,  H.  S.  G.,  23. 

United  agricultural  board,  144. 


2O4 


Index. 


University  of  Virginia,  13,  14,  23 
(note),  38,  61,  62-64,  68,  71,  76. 

Utah,  43. 

Vaccine  agent,  118. 

Veterinarian,  state,  137. 

Virginia  Agricultural  and  Me- 
chanical College,  see  Virginia 
Polytechnic  Institute. 

Virginia  Corporation  Company, 
158. 

Virginia  Educational  Journal,  16. 

Virginia  Health  Bulletin,  123. 

Virginia  Military  Institute,  14, 
36,  65,  67,  68,  76. 

Virginia  Normal  and  Industrial 
Institute,  69. 

Virginia  Polytechnic  Institute, 
39,  67-<59,  76,  139- 

Virginia  School  for  the  Colored 
Deaf  and  Blind,  67. 


Virginia    School    for    the    Deaf 

and  Blind,  67. 

Virginia  School  Journal,  29. 
Virginia  School  Register,  43. 
Virginia  State  Library,  44. 
Virginia   Teachers'   Association, 

23,  25. 

Viva  voce  voting,  83,  87. 
Voluntary    Library    Association 

of  Virginia,  46. 
Walker,  G.  C,  184. 
Walton,  M.  L.,  83,  84  (note). 
West    Virginia,    debt    relations 

with,  184-191. 
William  and  Mary  College,   n, 

60-62,  72,  76. 

Wisconsin,  school  system,  39. 
Woodstock,  35. 
Wythe,  George,  n,  61. 


JOHNS  HOPKINS  UNIVERSITY  STUDIES 

IN 

Historical  and  Political  Science 

Under  the  Direction  of  the 

Departments  of  History,  Political 

Economy  and  Political  Science 


THIRTIETH  SERIES,  1912 


The  University  Studies  will  continue  to  publish,  as  heretofore, 
the  results  of  recent  investigations  in  History,  Political  Economy 
and  Political  Science. 

For  the  year  1912  the  titles  given  below  are  now  announced  ; 
other  numbers  will  follow  from  time  to  time. 

Administration  in  Virginia.  By  F.  A.  MAQBUDEB.  $1.25. 
Cloth,  $1.50. 

The  Standard  Rate  in  American  Trade  Unions. 
By  D.  A.  McCABB. 

Membership  in  American  Trade  Unions.    By  F.  E. 

WOLFE. 

The  cost  of  subscription  for  the  regular  annual  series,  com- 
prising about  600  pages,  with  index  is  $3.00  (foreign  postage,  50 
<**»nts).  Single  numbers,  or  special  monographs,  at  special  prices. 


Disturbing  Elements  in  the  Study 

and  Teaching  of  Political 

Economy 

By  JAMES  BONAR 

M.A.   (Oxford),  LL.<D.  (Glasgow) 
156  Pages.  8vo.  Cloth.  $1.00 


This  volume  consists  of  five  lectures  delivered  at 
the  Johns  Hopkins  University  in  the  spring  of  1910  by 
Dr.  James  Bonar,  the  distinguished  English  economist 
now  filling  the  office  of  Deputy  Master  of  the  Royal 
Mint,  Ottawa. 

As  the  title  suggests,  the  lectures  are  discourses 
not  on  economic  error  in  general,  but  on  the  more 
subtle  fallacies  which  are  apt  to  invade  the  reasoning  of 
trained  economists  in  spite  of  learning  and  discipline. 
Such  errors  creep  in  from  a  popular  political  philosophy 
(Lecture  I),  from  want  of  any  political  philosophy  (II), 
from  mistaken  aversion  to  theory  (III),  from  the  short- 
comings of  common  or  technical  language  (IV),  and 
from  the  wrong  handling  of  distinctions  of  time  (V). 

The  lectures  are  distinguished  by  the  scholarly 
tone  and  philosophical  breadth  that  characterize  Dr. 
Bonar's  writings. 

Orders  should  be  sent  to 

THE  JOHNS  HOPKINS  PRESS, 

BALTIMORE,  MARYLAND 

ii. 


The  Quarterly  Journal  of  Economics 

Editor:  F.  W.  TAUSSIG. 

Associate  Editors:  T.  N.  CABVEK,  W.  Z.  EIPLEY,  O.  M.  W.  SPRAGUE, 
C.  J.  BULLOCK,  E.  F.  GAY,  W.  M.  COLE. 

THE  QUARTERLY  JOURNAL  OF  ECONOMICS  deals  with  all  aspects  of  eco- 
nomics and  has  the  support  of  the  most  distinguished  writers  on  the  subject 
in  this  country  and  in  Europe.  It  does  not  pretend  to  be  popular.  Its  object 
is  to  promote  research  and  to  advance  economic  science,  and  it  receives  and 
welcomes  contributions  from  all  schools  of  thought.  It  gives  a  good  share 
of  space  to  economic  theory  and  economic  history,  but  it  publishes  also 
substantial  articles  on  questions  of  the  day. 

The  JOURNAL  is  published  quarterly  in  November,  February,  May,  and 
August.  Each  number  contains  from  150  to  200  pages,  making  the  volume 
700  or  more  pages.  Subscription  $3.00  a  year,  to  be  remitted  to  the  Publi- 
cation Agent  of  Harvard  University,  Cambridge,  Mass. 


JUST  PUBLISHED 

Railway  Rate  Theories  of  the  Interstate 
Commerce  Commission 

By  M.  B.  HAMMOND 

Professor  of  Economics  in  Ohio  State   University 
Svo.     196  pages.    Cloth,  $1.00  net. 

The  most  detailed  and  thoro  analysis  yet  made  of  the  decisions  of  the 
Commission.  Ihe  theories  are  grouped  for  examination  under  the  following 
heads:  VALUE  OF  SERVICE;  COST  OF  SERVICE;  DISTANCE;  NATURAL  AD- 
VANTAGES OF  LOCATION;  COMPETITION;  CLASS  AND  SECTIONAL  INTERESTS; 
FAIR  EETURN  ON  INVESTMENT. 

A  general  summary  of  conclusions  is  given  at  the  close. 

Students  of  public  service  questions,  legislators,  and  railway  managers  and 
attorneys  will  find  in  the  volume  a  mine  of  valuable  information  and  clear- 
headed analysis. 

Banking  Reform  in  the  United  States 

A  Series  of  Proposals  Including  a  Central  Bank  of  Limited  Scope 

BY 
0.  M.  W.  SPRAGUE 

Assistant  Professor  of  Banking  and  Finance  in  Harvard  University 

Svo.    176  pages.    Cloth,  $1.00  net. 

Professor  Sprague  *s  four  articles  on  banking  reform,  which  have  appeared 
in  recent  numbers  of  the  Quarterly  Journal  of  Economics,  are  reprinted 
in  this  volume. 


For  sale  at  all  bookstores 


Published  by 

HARVARD  UNIVERSITY 

Publication  Office,  2  University  Hall,  Cambridge 


STUDIES  IN  HISTORY,  ECONOMICS 
AND  PUBLIC  LAW 

EDITED  BY 

THE  FACULTY  OF  POLITICAL  SCIENCE  OF 
COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY 


RECENT  NUMBERS. 


VOLUME  XXXIX,  1910-1911.     651  pp.     Price,  cloth,   $4.50. 

1.  [108]  The  Making  of  the  Balkan  States. 

By  WILLIAM  SMITH  MURRAY,  Ph.D.     Price,  $1.50. 

2.  [103]    Political  History  of  New  York  State  during  the  Period  of  the  Civil  War. 

By  SIDNEY  DAVID  BBUMMER,  Ph.D.     Price,  $3.00. 

VOLUME  XL,  1911.     633  pp.    Price,  cloth,  $4.50. 

1.  [104]  A  Surrey  of  Constitutional  Development  in  China. 

By  HAWKLING  L.  YEN,  Ph.D.    Price,  $1.00. 

2.  T106]  Ohio  Politics  during  the  Civil  War  Period. 

By  GEOEGB  H.  PORTER,  Ph.D.     Price,  $1.75. 

3.  t!06]  The  Territorial  Basis  of  Government  under  the  State  Constitutions. 

By  ALFRED  ZANTZINGER  REED,  Ph.D.     Price,  $1.75. 

VOLUME  XLI,  1911.     514  pp.     Price,  cloth,  $3.50;  paper  covers,  $3.00. 
[107]  New  Jersey  as  a  Royal  Provice.  By  EDGAR  JACOB  FISHER,  Ph.D. 

VOLUME  XLII,  1911.    400  pp.    Price,  cloth,  $3.00;  paper  covers,  $2.50. 
[108]  Attitude  of  American  Courts  in  Labor  Cases. 

By  GEORGE  GORHAM  GROAT,  Ph.D. 

VOLUME   XLIII,    1911.     633   pp.     Price,    cloth,    $4.50. 

1.  [108]  "Industrial  Causes  of  Congestion  of  Population  in  New  York  City. 

By  EDWARD  EWING  PRATT,  Ph.D.     Price,  $2.00. 

2.  [110]  Education  and  the  Mores.     By  F.  STUART  CHAPIN,  Ph.D.     Price,  75  ceats. 

3.  [Ill]  The  British  Consuls  in  the  Confederacy. 

By  MILLEDGE  L.  BONHAM,  JR.,  Ph.D.     Price,  $2.00. 

VOLUMES  XLIV  and  XLV,  1911.     745  pp. 

Price  for  the  two  volumes,  cloth,  $6.00;  paper  covers,  $5.00. 
[112  and  113]  The  Economic  Principles  of  Confucius  and  his  School. 

By  CHEN  HUAN-CHANG,  Ph.D. 
VOLUME    XLVI,    1911-1912. 

1.  [114]  The  Hicardian  Socialists. 

By   ESTHER   LOWENTHAL,    Ph.D.     Price,    $1.00. 

2.  [116]  Ibrahim  Pasha,  Grand  Vizier  of  Suleiman,  the  Magnificent. 

By  HESTER  DONALDSON  JENKINS,  Ph.D.    Price,  $1.00. 

3.  [116]  The  Labor  Movement  in  France.    A  Study  of  French  Syndicatism. 

By   Louis   LEVINE.     (In  press.) 


The  price  for  each  volume  is  for  the  set  of  monographs  in  paper.  Each  volume,  as 
well  as  the  separate  monographs  marked  *,  can  be  supplied  in  cloth-bound  copies 
for  fifty  cents  additional.  All  prices  are  net. 

The  set  of  forty-five  volumes,  comprising  monographs  1-113  is  offered  bound 
for  $152:    except  that  Vol.   II   can   be   supplied   only  in  part  and  in 
paper  covers,  No.  1  of  that .  volume  being  out  of  print.    Vol- 
umes   I,    III    and    IV    can    now    be    supplied    only    la 
connection  with  complete  sets. 


For  further  information  apply  to 

Prof.   EDWIN  R.    A.   SELIGMAN,   Columbia   University, 

or  to  MESSRS.  LONGMANS,  GREEN  &  CO.,  New  York. 
London:  P.  S.  KING  &  SON,  Orchard  House,  Westminster. 

iv 


Books  for  the  Citizen 


GETTELL.    Introduction  to  Political  Science.     By  KAYMOND  G.  GETTELL, 

of  Trinity  College,  Hartford.    $2.00. 

A  general  outline  of  political  science,  viewing  the  state  from  the  stand- 
point of  past  development  and  present  conditions. 

"  The  book  shows  not  only  a  masterful  grasp  of  the  subject,  but  also  a  remark- 
able power  of  condensation  and  coordination." 

— Dr.  Leo  S.  Kowe,  University  of  Pennsylvania. 
"  It  easily  outranks  any  of  the  texts  now  In  the  field." 

— Charles  G.  Haines,  Whitman  College,  Walla  Walla. 

Readings  in  Political  Science.  By  EAYMOND  G.  GETTELL,  of  Trinity  Col- 
lege, Hartford.  $2.25. 

The  first  book  of  readings  on  this  subject  to  be  published.  It  may  be 
read  with  profit  by  all  who  desire  introduction  to  that  body  of  literature 
which  deals  with  the  origin,  development,  organization,  and  activities  of 
the  state. 

FESS.  The  History  of  Political  Theory  and  Party  Organization  in  the 
United  States.  By  SIMEON  D.  FESS,  of  Antioch  College,  Yellow 
Springs,  O.  $1.50. 

One  of  our  leading  dailies  says  of  President  Fess's  book:  "No  book  on 
the  market  gives  a  better  idea  of  the  history  of  political  organization  than 
this.  It  presents  in  a  concise  and  interesting  way  the  story  of  the  struggles 
and  issues  involved  in  the  organization  of  political  parties,  with  sidelights 
on  the  motives  and  character  of  the  great  leaders." 

"  This  is  a  delightful  book  written  in  just  the  manner  that  such  a  work 
ought  to  be.  It  is  sympathetic,  graphic,  and  picturesque.  I  do  not  find  a  dry 
line  in  it  from  cover  to  cover. 

"  Moreover  it  is  as  reliable  as  it  is  interesting.  The  author  states  facts  with 
as  little  bias  as  is  possible  to  a  human  being.  In  the  short  space  of  a  little  more 
than  four  hundred  pages  only  the  essentials  can  be  packed  in.  But  the  essentials 
are  here  and  only  the  non-essentials  are  left  out." 

— Edwin  A.  Grosvenor,  Professor  of  Modern  Government  and 
International  Law,  Amherst  College. 

REINSCH.  Readings  on  American  Federal  Government.  By  PAUL  S. 
EEINSCH,  Professor  of  Political  Science,  in  the  University  of  Wisconsin. 
$2.75. 

This  book  contains  in  a  single  volume  a  large  amount  of  documentary 
material  illustrative  of  almost  every  branch  of  our  government  as  it  is  today. 
The  selections  are  mainly  from  the  written  or  spoken  words  of  men  actually 
engaged  in  the  business  of  government, — presidents,  legislators,  administra- 
tors, officials,  and  judges. 

"  The  serviceableness  of  Professor  Reinsch's  book  to  the  teacher  and  student, 
whatever  the  range  of  library  facilities  at  command,  can  hardly  be  overesti- 
mated, and  we  are  glad  to  give  the  work  hearty  commendation." — The  Nation. 

Readings  on  American  State  Government.  By  PAUL  S.  EEINSCH,  Uni- 
versity of  Wisconsin.  $2.25. 

Selected  documents,  speeches,  and  other  articles,  bearing  on  every  impor- 
tant current  phase  or  movement  in  American  State  Government. 

The  readings  are  not  abstractly  legalistic,  but  present  to  the  student  the 
organization  and  workings  of  our  state  government  with  a  realism  that 
rouses  interest  and  stimulates  understanding. 


GINN  AND  COHPANY 


BOSTON  NEW  YORK          CHICAGO          LONDON  ATLANTA          DALLAS 

COLUHBUS  SAN  FRANCISCO 


American  Diplomacy  under  Tyler 
and   Polk 

BY  JESSE  S.  BEEVES,  Pn.D. 
335  pages.     Cloth.    Price,  $1.50 

TMs  volume  discusses  the  Northeastern  Boundary  Controversy  ;  the  Ashburton 
Treaty ;  the  Relations  between  Mexico  and  the  United  States,  1825-1843  ;  the 
Annexation  of  Texas ;  the  Northwestern  Boundary  Controversy  ;  the  Oregon 
Treaty  ;  Folk's  attempted  Negotiation  for  California  ;  the  Outbreak  of  the  Mexi- 
can War  ;  the  Treaty  of  Guadalupe  Hidalgo. 

International  Law  and  Diplomacy  of  the 
Spanish-American  War 

BY  ELBEKT  J.  BENTON,  Pn.D. 
300  pages.    Cloth.    Price,  $1.50 

Among  the  topics  discussed  are  :  Cuba  and  National  Policy  ;  American  Neu- 
trality, 1895-1897  ;  Abandonment  of  Non-intervention  Policy ;  Intervention  ; 
Transition  from  Neutrality  to  Belligerency  ;  Relations  of  the  Belligerents;  Re- 
lations between  Belligerents  and  Neutrals  ;  Negotiations  of  [Belligerents  during 
War  ;  Restoration  of  Peace ;  Interpretation  and  Fulfilment  of  Treaty  of  Peace. 


1838-1846. 

By  EPHRIAM  D.  ADAMS,  Ph.D. 

Professor  of  History  in  Leland  Stanford  Jr.  University 
276  Pages.    Cloth,  $1.5O 

This  work  is  the  result  of  extended  research  in  the  diplomatic  archives  of  this 
country  and  of  Great  Britain.  The  author  throws  new  and  interesting  light  on  the 
attitude  of  the  English  government  toward  Mexico,  Texas,  and  the  United  States 
during  the  agitation  for  Texan  independence  and  annexation.  The  book  is  a 
valuable  contribution  to  the  diplomatic  questions  discussed  in  part  in  the  previous 
volume  by  Reeves,  published  also  in  this  series.  It  contains  chapters  on  First 
Indications  of  British  Interest;  The  Negotiations  of  Treat  and  Hamilton;  British 
Recognition  Postponed.  Kennedy's  Mission  to  Texas;  The  Montezuma  and  the 
Guadeloupe;  First  British  Offer  of  Mediation.  Elliot  in  Texas;  The  Robinson 
Armistice  and  the  London  Abolition  Meeting;  The  Calhoun-Pakenham  Corre- 
spondence; Aberdeen's  Plan  to  Prevent  Annexation;  Aberdeen's  Withdrawal  from 
Joint  Action  with  France;  Elliot's  Mission  to  Mexico;  Texas  Annexed;  English 
Interest  in  the  Annexation  of  California. 

Orders  should  be  addressed  to 

THE  JOHNS  HOPKINS  PRESS 

Baltimore,  Maryland. 

Tl 


A  REPRINT  OF 

ECONOMIC   TRACTS 


The  Johns   Hopkins   Press   invites   subscriptions   to   a   reprint   of   four 
important  economic  essays  of  the  eighteenth  century,  to  be  issued  consecu- 
tively under  the  editorial  direction  of  Professor  Hollander: — 
The  Querist,  containing  several  queries,  proposed  to  the  consideration  of 
the  public.     Parts  I,  II,  III.     By  George .  Berkeley.     Dublin,  1735-37. 
(Beady.) 

An  Essay  on  the   Governing  Causes   of  the  Natural  Rate   of   Interest; 
wherein  the  sentiments  of  Sir  William  Petty  and  Mr.  Locke,  on  that 
head,  are  considered.    By  Joseph  Massie.    London,  1750.    (Ready.) 
Money  answers  all  Things:  or  an  essay  to  make  money  sufficiently  plenti- 
ful amongst  all  ranks  of  people,  and  increase  our  foreign  and  do- 
mestick  trade.    By  Jacob  Vanderlint.     London,  1734.     (In  press.) 
Aa  Essay  on  Ways  and  Means  for  raising  Money  for  the  support  of  the 
present  war,  without  increasing  the  public  debts.     By  Francis  Fau- 
quier.      London,    1756. 

Each  tract  will  be  supplied  by  the  editor  with  a  brief  introduction  and 
with  text  annotations  where  indispensable.  The  general  appearance  of 
the  title-page  will  be  preserved,  and  the  originkl  pagination  will  be 
indicated. 

The  edition  will  be  limited  to  five  hundred  copies.  With  a  view  to 
serving  the  largest  student  usefulness,  the  subscription  for  the  entire 
series  of  four  tracts  has  been  fixed  at  the  net  price  of  Two  Dollars. 

Of    the    tracts    heretofore    reprinted,    a    limited    number    can    yet    be 
obtained,   as   follows.     As   the   editions   approach   exhaustion,   the   prices 
indicated  are  likely  to  be  increased  without  notice: — 
Asgill,  "  Several  Assertions  Proved."    London,  1696.    Price,  50  cents. 
Barbon,  "  A  Discourse  of  Trade."    London,  1690.    Price,  50  cents. 
For  trey,  "  England's  Interest  Considered."    Cambridge,  1663.    Price,  50  cts. 
Longe,  "A  Refutation  of  the  Wage-Fund  Theory."     London,  1866.     Price, 

75  cents. 
Malthus,  "An  Inquiry  into  the  Nature  and  Progress  of  Rent."    London, 

1815.    Price,  75  cents. 

North,  "Discourses  upon  Trade."    London,  1691.    Price,  50  cents. 
Ricardo,  "Three  Letters  on  'The  Price  of  Gold.'"     London,  1809.     Price, 

75  cents. 

West,  "  Essay  on   the  Application  of  Capital  to  Land."     London,  1815. 
Price,  75  cents. 


Subscriptions  and  orders  should  be  sent  to 

THE  JOHNS  HOPKINS  PRESS 

BALTIMORE,  MD. 

vii 


New  Series  of  Extra  Volumes 

of  the 

Johns  Hopkins  University  Studies  in  Histor- 
ical and  Political  Science 

The  Johns  Hopkins  Press  announce  the  inauguration  of  a  new 
series  of  Extra  Volumes  to  its  regular  annual  series  of  Studies  in  His- 
torical and  Political  Sciences.  These  volumes  will  be  in  uniform  cloth 
binding  and  will  vary  in  size  from  200  to  500  pages  with  corres- 
ponding prices.  Subscription  to  the  annual  series  of  Studies  will  not 
include  subscription  to  these  extra  volumes,  although  these  will  be 
offered  to  subscribers  at  reduced  prices. 


No.  I  of  this  new  series  of  Extra  Volumes  is  now  ready 
and  is  entitled 

The   Revision   and   Amendment  of 

State  Constitutions 
BY 

WALTER  FAIRLEIGH  DODD 

Sometime  Henry  E.  Johnston  Scholar  in  the  Johns  Hopkins  University. 

368  Pages.    8vo.    Cloth.    Price  $2.00 

This  important  study  in  American  Constitutional  Law  gives  a 
statement,  descriptive  and  critical,  of  the  methods  adopted  in  this 
country  for  the  amendment  and  revision  of  State  Constitutions,  and 
discusses  with  a  thoroughness  not  elsewhere  to  be  found  the  legal  powers 
of  conventions  and  of  legislatures  with  reference  to  constitutional  re- 
vision and  amendment.  The  historical  aspects  of  the  subject, 
especially  with  respect  to  the  Constitutional  Convention,  also  receive 
careful  consideration. 

Orders  should  be  addressed  to 

THE  JOHNS  HOPKINS  PRESS, 

BALTIMORE,  MARYLAND. 


JOHNS  HOPKINS  UNIVERSITY  STUDJES 

IN 

HISTORICAL  AND  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

Edited  by  HERBERT  B.  ADAMS,  1882-1901 


*  Not  sold  separately. 

FIRST  SERIES.— 1883.— $4.00. 

I.  An  Introduction  to  American  Institutional  History.    By  E.  A.  FREEMAN.    25  cents. 

II.  The  Germanic  Origin  of  New  England  Towns.     By  H.  B.  ADAMS.     50  cents. 

III.  Local  Government  in  Illinois.     By   ALBERT   SHAW. — Local  Government  in  Pennsyl- 
vania.    By  E.  R.  L.  GOULD.     30  cents. 

IV.  Saxon  Tithingmen  in  America.     By  H.  B.  ADAMS.     50  cents. 

V.  Local  Government  in  Michigan  and  the  Northwest.     By  E.  W.  BBMIS.     25  cents. 

VI.  Parish  Institutions  of  Maryland.     By  EDWAED  INGLE.     40  cents. 

VII.  Old  Maryland  Manors.    By  JOHN  HEMSLET  JOHNSON.     30  cents. 

VIII.  Norman  Constables  in  America.     By  H.  B.  ADAMS.     50  cents. 

IX-X,  Village  Communities  of  Cape  Ann  and  Salem.    By  H.  B.  ADAMS.     50  cents. 

XI.  The  Genesis  of  a  New  England  State.    By  A.  JOHNSTON.    30  cents. 
•XII,  Local  Government  and  Schools  in  South  Carolina.     By  B.  J.  RAMAGE. 

SECOND  SERIES.— 1884.— $4.00. 
*I-II.  Methods  of  Historical  Study.    By  H.  B.  ADAMS. 

III.  The  Past  and  Present  of  Political  Economy.     By  R.  T.  ELY.     35  cents. 

IV.  Samuel  Adams,  the  Man  of  the  Town  Meeting.    By  JAMES  K.  HOSMEB.     35  cents. 
V-VI.  Taxation  in  the  United  States.    By  HENRY  CARTER  ADAMS.    50  cents. 

VII.  Institutional  Beginnings  in  a  Western  State.     By  JESSE  MACY.     25  cents. 
VIII-IX.  Indian  Money  in  New  England,  etc.     By  WILLIAM  B.  WEEDEN.     50  cents. 
*X.  Town  and  County  Government  in  the  Colonies.     By  E.  CHANNING. 

*XI.  Rudimentary  Society  among  Boys.     By  J.  HEMSLEY  JOHNSON. 

XII.  Land  Laws  of  Mining  Districts.     By  C.  H.  SHINN.     50  cents. 

THIRD  SERIES.— i885.-r$4.oo. 

I.  Maryland's  Influence  upon  Land  Cessions  to  the  TJ.  S.    By  H.  B.  ADAMS.     75  cents. 
II-III.  Virginia  Local  Institutions.    By  E.  INGLE.     75  cents. 

IV.  Recent  American  Socialism.     By  RICHARD  T.  ELY.     50  cents. 
V-VI-VII.  Maryland  Local  Institutions.     By  LEWIS  W.  WII.HELM.     $1.00. 

VIII.  Influence  of  the  Proprietors  in  Founding  New  Jersey.    By  A.  SCOTT.     25  cents. 
IX-X.  American  Constitutions.     By  HORACE  DAVIS.     50  cents. 

XI-XII.  The  City  of  Washington.    By  J.  A.  PORTER.     50  cents. 

FOURTH    SERIES.— 1886.— $3.50. 

I.  Dutch  Village  Communities  on  the  Hudson  River.     By  I.  ELTING.     50  cents. 
II-III.  Town  Government  in  Rhode  Island.    By  W.  E.  FOSTER. — The  Narragansett  Plant- 
ers.    By  EDWARD  CHANNING.     50  cents. 
TV.  Pennsylvania  Boroughs.     By  WILLIAM  P.  HOLCOMB. 

V.  Introduction  to  Constitutional  History  of  the  States.     By  J.  F.  JAMESON.     50  cents. 
•VI.  The  Puritan  Colony  at  Annapolis,  Maryland.     By  D.  R.  RANDALL. 
VII-VIII-IX.  The  Land  Question  in  the  United  States.     By  S.  SATO.     $1.00. 

X.  Town  and  City  Government  of  New  Haven.     By  C.  H.  LEVEHMORE.     50  cents. 
XI-XII.  Land  System  of  the  New  England  Colonies.     By  M.  EGLESTON.     50  cents. 

FIFTH  SERIES.— 1887.— $3.50. 

I-II.  City  Government  of  Philadelphia.     By  E.  P.  ALLINSON  and  B.  PJJNBOSB.     50  cents 
[II.  City  Government  of  Boston.    By  JAMES  M.  BUGBEE.     25  cents. 
*IV.  City  Government  of  St.  Louis.     By  MARSHALL  S.  SNOW. 
V-VI.  Local  Government  in  Canada.    By  JOHN  GEORGE  BOURINOT.    50  cents. 

VII.  Effect  of  the  War  of  1812  upon  the  American  Union.    By  N.  M.  BUTLER.     25  cents 

VIII.  Notes  on  the  Literature  of  Charities.    By  HERBERT  B.  ADAMS.     25  cents. 

IX.  Predictions  of  Hamilton  and  De  Tocqueville.     By  JAMES  BRYCE.     25  cents. 

X.  The  Study  of  History  in  England  and  Scotland.     By  P.  FREDERICQ.     25  cents. 

XI.  Seminary  Libraries  and  University  Extension.     By  H.  B.  ADAMS.     25  cents. 

XII.  European  Schools  of  History  and  Politics.     By  A.  D.  WHITE.     25  cents. 

SIXTH  SERIES.— 1888.— $3.50. 
The  History  of  Co-operation  in  the  United  States. 

SEVENTH  SERIES.— 1889. 

(Volume  sold  only  with  complete  set.) 
I.  Arnold  Toynbee.     By  F.  C.  MONTAGUE.     50  cents. 

II-III.  Municipal  Government  in  San  Francisco.     By  BERNARD  MOSES.     50  cents. 
IV.  Municipal  History  of  New  Orleans.     By  WM.  W.  HOWE.     25  cents. 
•V-VI.  English  Culture  in  Virginia.     By  WILLIAM  P.  TRENT. 

VII-VIII-IX.  The  River  Towns  of  Connecticut.     By  CHARLES  M.  ANDREWS.     $1.00. 
•X-XI-XII.  Federal    Government    in    Canada.      By    JOHN    G.    BOURINOT. 

ix 


EIGHTH   SERIES.— 1890. 

(Volume  sold  only  with  complete  set.) 
I-II.  The  Beginnings  of  American  Nationality.     By  A.  W.  SMALL.     $1.00. 

III.  Local  Government  in  Wisconsin.     By  D.  B.  SPENCEB.     25  cents. 
*IV.  Spanish  Colonization  in  the  Southwest.    By  P.  W.  BLACKMAK. 

V-VI.  The  Study  of  History  in  Germany  and  France.    By  P.  FBEDEBICQ.     $1.00. 
VII-IX.  Progress  of  the  Colored  People  of  Maryland.     By  J.  R.  BEACKBTT.     $1.00. 
•X.  The    Study    of    History    in    Belgium    and    Holland.      By    P.    FREDERICQ. 
XI  XII.  Seminary  Notes  on  Historical  Literature.    By  H.  B.  ADAMS  and  others.    50  cents. 

NINTH  SERIES.— 1891. 
(Volume  sold  only  with  complete  set.) 

•I-II.  Government  of  the  United  States.    By  W.  W.  WILLOOGHBY  and  W.  F.  WILIXHJGHBY. 
Ill  IV.  University   Education   in   Maryland.     By   B.    C.    STEINER.      The   Johns   Hopkins 

University   (1876-1891).     By  D.  C.  OILMAN.     50  cents. 
*V-VI.  Municipal  Unity  in  the  Lombard  Communes.     By  W.  K.  WILLIAMS. 
VII- VIII.  Public  Lands  of  the  Roman  Republic.    By  A.  STEPIIENSON.     75  cents. 

IX.  Constitutional  Development  of  Japan.    By  T.  IYENAGA.     50  cents. 
«X.  A  History  of  Liberia.     By  J.  H.  T.  MCPHERSON. 

XI-XII.  The  Indian  Trade  in  Wisconsin.    By  F.  J.  TURNER.     50  cents. 

TENTH  SERIES.— 1892.— $3.50. 

I.  The  Bishop  Hill  Colony.    By  MICHAEL  A.  MIKKELSBN.    50  cents. 

II  III.     Church  and  State  in  New  England.     By  PADL  E.  LAUEB.     50  cents. 

IV.  Church  and  State  in  Maryland.    By  GEORGE  PBTHIE.     50  cents. 

*V-VI.  Religious  Development  in  the  Province  of  North  Carolina.     By  S.  B.  WBBKS. 

VII.  Maryland's  Attitude  in  the  Struggle  for  Canada.     By  J.  W.  BLACK.     50  cents. 
VIII-IX.  The  Quakers  in  Pennsylvania.     By  A.  C.  APPLEGABTH.     75  cents. 

X-XI.  Columbus  and  his  Discovery  of  America.    By  H.  B.  ADAMS  and  H.  WOOD.     50  cents. 
XII.  Causes   of   the   American   Revolution.     By   J.    A.    WOODBUBN.     50   cents. 

ELEVENTH  SERIES.— 1893.— $3.50. 

I.  The  Social  Condition  of  Labor.    By  E.  R.  L.  GOCLD.    50  cents. 

II.  The  World's  Representative  Assemblies  of  To-Day.     By  E.  K.  ALDEN.     50  cents. 
III-IV.  The  Negro  in  the  District  of  Columbia.    By  EDWARD  INGLE.     $1.00. 

V-VI.  Church  and  State  in  North  Carolina.     By  STEPHEN  B.  WEEKS.     50  cents. 
VII-VIII.  The  Condition  of  the  Western  Farmer,  etc.    By  A.  F.  BENTLBY.     $1.00. 
IX-X.  History  of  Slavery  in  Connecticut.    By  BBBNABD  C.  STEINER.    75  cents. 
XI-XII.  Local  Government  in  the  South.    By  E.  W.  BEMIS  and  others.     $1.00. 
TWELFTH  SERIES.— 1894.— $3.50. 

I-II.  The   Cincinnati   Southern    Railway.     By    J.    H.    HOLI.ANDEB.     $1.00. 

III.  Constitutional  Beginnings  of  North  Carolina.    By  J.  S.  BASSETT.     50  cents. 

IV.  Struggle  of  Dissenters  for  Toleration  in  Virginia.     By  H.  R.  MC!LWAINB.  50  cents. 
V-VI-VII.  The  Carolina  Pirates  and  Colonial  Commerce.     By  S.  C.  HUGHSON.  $1.00. 
VIII-IX.  Representation  and  Suffrage  in  Massachusetts.     By  G.  H.  HAYNES.  50  cents. 

X.  English  Institutions  and  the  American  Indian.    By  J.  A.  JAMES.     25  cents. 
XI-XII.  International  Beginnings  of  the  Congo  Free  State.    By  J.  S.  REEVES.  50  cents. 

THIRTEENTH  SERIES.— 1895.— $3.50. 

I-II.  Government  of  the  Colony  of  South  Carolina.    By  E.  L.  WHITNEY.     75  cents. 
III-IV.  Early  Relations  of  Maryland   and  Virginia.     By   J.   H.   LATANE.     50   cents. 

V.  The  Rise  of  the  Bicameral  System  in  America.    By  T.  F.  MOBAN.     50  cents. 
VI- VII.  White  Servitude  in  the  Colony  of  Virginia.     By  J.  C.  BALLAGH.     50  cents. 

VIII.  The  Genesis  of  California's  First  Constitution.    By  R.  D.  HUNT.     50  cents. 

IX.  Benjamin  Franklin  as  an  Economist.     By  W.  A.  WETZEI.     50  cents. 

X.  The  Provisional  Government  of  Maryland.     By  J.  A.  SILVEB.     50  cents. 

XI-XII.  Government  and  Religion  of  the  Virginia  Indians.    By  S.  R.  HENDBEN.    50  cents 

FOURTEENTH  SERIES.— 1896.— $3.50. 

I.  Constitutional  History  of  Hawaii.    By  HENBY  E.  CHAMBERS.     25  cents. 

II.  City  Government  of  Baltimore.     By  THADDEUS  P.  THOMAS.     25  cents. 

III.  Colonial  Origins  of  New  England  Senates.     By  F.  L.  RILEY.     50  cents. 
IV-V.  Servitude  in  the  Colony  of  North  Carolina.     By  J.  S.  BASSETT.     50  cents. 
VI-VII.  Representation  in  Virginia.     By  J.  A.  C.  CHANDLER.     50  cents. 

VIII.  History  of  Taxation  in  Connecticut  (1636-1776).       By  F.  R.  JONES.     50  cents. 
IX-X.  A  Study  of  Slavery  in  New  Jersey.    By  HENBY  S.  COOLEY.     50  cents. 
XI-XII.  Causes  of  the  Maryland  Revolution  of  1689.    By  F.  E.  SPABKS.     50  cents. 

FIFTEENTH  SERIES.— 1897.— $3-50. 

I-II.  The  Tobacco  Industry  in  Virginia  since  1860.    By  B.  W.  ABNOLD.    5Q  cents. 
III-V.  Street  Railway  System  of  Philadelphia.     By  F.  W.  SPEIBS.     75  cents. 

VI.  Daniel  Raymond.     By  C.  P.  NBILL.     50  cents. 

VII-VIII.  Economic  History  of  B.  &  0.  R.  R.     By  M.  REIZENSTEIN.     50  cents. 

IX.  The  South  American  Trade  of  Baltimore.    By  F.  R.  RUTTBB.    50  cents. 

X-XI.  State  Tax  Commissions  in  the  United  States.    By  J.  W.  CHAPMAN.     50  cents. 
XII.  Tendencies  li  American  Economic  Thought.    By  S.  SHEBWOOD.    25  cents. 

SIXTEENTH  SERIES.— 1898.— $3-5<>. 
I-IV.  The  Neutrality  of  the  American  Lakes,  etc.    By  J.  M.  CALLAHAN.    $1.25.    Cloth,  $1.50. 

V.  West  Florida.     By  H.  E.  CHAMBEBS.     25  cents. 

VI.  Anti-Slavery  Leaders  of  North  Carolina.    By  J.  S.  BASSETT.     50  cents. 
VII-IX.  Life  and  Administration  of  Sir  Robert  Eden.    By  B.  C.  STEINER.     $1.00. 

X-XI.  The  Transition  of  North  Carolina  from  a  Colony.     By  E.  W.  SIKBS.     50  cents. 
XII.  Jared  Sparks  and  Alexis  De  Tocqueville.    By  H.  B.  ADAMS.     25  cents. 


SEVENTEENTH  SERIES.— 1899.— $3.50. 

I-II-III.  History  of   State   ian^ng  ia   Maryland.     By   A.   C.    BRYAN.     $1.00. 
IV-Y.  The  Know-Nothing  Party  in  Maryland.    By  L.  F.  SCHMECK.EBIEB.    75  cents. 

VI.  The  Lauauist  Colony  in  lu.u.rylanu.     liy  B.  B.  JAMUS.     5i>  etuis. 
VII-VIII.  History  of  biavery  in  nortn  Carolina.     By  J.  S.  BASSETT.     75  cents. 
1X-X-XI.  Development  of  tne  Cuesapea*e  at  Ohio  Canal.     By  G.  W.  WARD.     75  cents. 
XII.  Public  Educational  Wori  in  Baltimore.    By  HEKUKKX  B.  ADAMS.    25  cents. 

EIGHTEENTH  SERIES.— 1900.— $3.50. 

I-IV.  Studies  in  State  Taxation.    Edited  by  J.  H.  HOLLANDER.    Paper,  $1.00 ;  cloth,  $1.26 
V-VI.  The  Colonial  Executive  Prior  to  the  Eestoration.    By  P.  L.  KAVB.     50  cents. 

VII.  Constitution  and  Admission  of  Iowa  into  the  Union.     By  J.  A.  JAMES.    30  cents. 
VIII-IX.  The  Church  and  Popular  Education.     By  H.  B.  ADAMS.     50  cents. 
X-XII.  Religious  Freedom  in  Virginia:  The  Baptists.     By  \V.  T.  TUOM.     75  cents. 

NINETEENTH  SERIES.— 1901.— $3.50. 

I -III.  America  in  the  Pacific  and  the  Far  East.    By  J.  M.  CALLAHAN.    75  cents. 

IV-V.  State  Activities  in  Eolation  to  Labor.    By  W.  F.  WILLOUGHBY.    50  cents. 

VI-VII.  History  of  Suffrage  in  Virginia.    By  J.  A.  C.  CHANDLER.     50  cents. 

VIII-IX.  The  Maryland  Constitution  of  1864.    By  W.  S.  MYERS.     50  cents. 

X.  Life  of  Commissary  James  Blair.     By  D.  E.  MOTLEY.     25  cents. 

XI-XII.  Gov.  Hicks  of  Maryland  and  the  Civil  War.    By  G.  L.  RADCLIFFB.     50  cents. 

TWENTIETH    SERIES.— 1902.— $3.50. 

I.  'Western  Maryland  In  the  Revolution.     By  B.  C.  STEINER.     30  cents. 
II-III.  State  Banks  since  the  National  Bank  Act.     By  G.  E.  BAHNETT.     50  cents. 

IV.  Early  History  of  Internal  Improvements  in  Alabama.     By  W.  E.  MARTIN.     80  cents. 
*V-VI.  Trust  Companies  in  the  United  States.     By  GEORGE  CATOE. 

VII-VIII.  The  Maryland  Constitution  of  1851.     By  J.  W.  HARRY.     50  cents. 

IX-X.  Political  Activities  of  Philip  Freneau.     By  S.  E.  FORMAN.     50  cents. 

XI.-XII.  Continental  Opinion  on  a  Middle  European  Tariff  Union.    By  G.  M.  FISK.    30  cts. 

TWENTY-FIRST  SERIES.— 1903.— $3-5o. 

I--II.  The  Wabash  Trade  Route.    By  E.  .T.  BENTON.    50  cents. 

ni-IV.  Internal  Improvements  in  North  Carolina.     By  C.  C.  WEAVER.     50  cents. 

V.  History  of  Japanese  Paper  Currency.     By  M.  TAKAKI.     30  cents. 

VI-VII.  Economics    and    Politics    in    Maryland,    1720-1750,    and    the  Public    Services   ol 

Daniel  Dulany  the  Elder.     By  ST.  G.  L.  SIOUSSAT.     50  cents. 

VTII-IX-X.  Beginnings  of  Maryland,  1631-1639.     By  B.  C.  STEINER.  75  cents. 

XI-XII.  The  English  Statutes  in  Maryland.    By  ST.  G.  L.  SIOUSSAT.  50  cents. 

TWENTY-SECOND  SERIES.— 1904.— $3.50. 

I-II.  A  Trial  Bibliography  of  American  Trade-Union  Publications.    50  cents. 

III-IV.  White  Servitude  in  Maryland,  1634-1820.     By  E.  I.  McCOHMAC.     50  cents. 

V.  Switzerland  at  the  Beginning  of  the  Sixteenth  Century.    By  J.  M.  VINCENT.     30  cents. 

VI-VII-VIII.  The  History  of  Reconstruction  in  Virginia.     By  H.  J.  ECKENRODE.     50  cts. 

IX-X.  The  F«rei»m  Commerce  of  Japan  since  the  Restoration.    By  Y.  HATTORI.    50  cents. 

XI-XII.  Descriptions  of  Maryland.     By  B.  C.  STEINER.     50  cents. 

TWENTY-THIRD  SERIES.— 1905.— $3.50. 

I- II.  Reconstruction  in  South  Carolina.     Bv  .7.  P.  HOLI.IS.     50  cents. 

III-IV.  Political  Conditions  in  Maryland,  1777-1781.     By  B.  W.  BOND,  JR.     50  cents. 

V-VI.  Colonial  Administration  under  Lord  Clarendon,  1660-1667.    By  P.  L.  KAYE.     50  ct». 

VII-VIII.  Justice  in  Colonial  Virginia.     By  O.  P.  CHITWOOD.     50  cents. 

IX-X.  The  Napoleonic  Exiles  in  America,  1815-1819.    By  J.  S.  REEVES.    50  cents. 

XI-XII.  Municipal  Problems  in  Mediaeval  Switzerland.    By  J.  M.  VINCENT.  50  cents. 

TWENTY-FOURTH  SERIES.— 1906.— $3.50. 

I-II.  Spanish-American  Diplomatic  Relations  before  1898.  By  H.  E.  FLACK.  50  cents. 
III-IV.  The  Fininces  of  American  Trade  Unions.  By  A.  M.  SAKOLSKI.  75  cents. 
V-VI.  Diplomatic  Negotiations  of  the  United  States  with  Russia.  By  J.  C.  HILDT.  50  cts. 
Vn-VIII.  State  Rights  and  Parties  in  North  Carolina,  1776-1831.  By  H.  M.  WAGSTAPF.  50c. 
IX-X.  National  Labor  Federations  in  the  United  St»tes.  By  WILLIAM  KIRK.  75  cents. 
XI-XII.  Maryland  During  the  English  Civil  Wars.  Part  I.  By  B.  C.  STEINER.  50  cents. 

TWENTY-FIFTH  SERIES.— 1907.— $3.50. 

I.  Internal  Taxation  in  the  Philippines.     By  JOHN  S.  HOED.     30  cents. 
II-III.  The  Monroe  Mission  to  France,  1794-1796.     By  B.  W.  BOND,  Jr.     50  cents. 
IV-V.  Mf.ryland  During  the  English  Civil  Wars,  Part  II.     By  BERNARD  C.  STEINER.     50c. 
VI-VTI.  The  State  in  Constitutional  and  International  Law.     By  R.  T.  CRANE      50  cents 
VIII-IX-X.  Financial  History  of  Maryland,   1789-1848.     By  HUGH  S.  HANNA.     75  cents. 
XI-XII.  Apprenticeship  in  American  Trade  Unions.    By  J.~M.  MOTLEY.     50  cents. 

xi 


TWENTY-SIXTH   SERIES.— 1908.— $3.50. 

I  III.  British  Committees,   Commissions,   and  Councils  of  Trade  and  Plantations,   1622- 

1675.    By  C.  M.  ANDREWS.     75  cents. 
IV-VT.  Neutral  Rights  and  Obligations  in  the  Anglo-Boer  "War.     By  R.  G.   CAMPBELL. 

75  cents. 
VII-VIII.  The  Elizabethan  Parish  in  its  Ecclesiastical  and  Financial  Aspects.     By  S.  L. 

WARE.     50  cents. 
IX-X.  A  Study  of  the  Topography  and  Municipal  History  .of  Praeneste.     By  R.  V.  D. 

MAGOFFIN.     50  cents. 
XI-XII.  Beneficiary  Features  of  American  Trade  Unions.     By  J.  B.  KENNEDY.     50  cents. 

TWENTY-SEVENTH  SERIES— 1909— $3.50. 

I-II.  The  Self-Reconstruction  of  Maryland,  1864-1867.     By   W.    S.   MYERS.     50  cents. 
III-IV-V.  The    Development    of    the    English   Law    of    Conspiracy.     By    J.    W.    BKYAN. 

75  cents. 
VI-VII.  Legislative    and    Judicial    History    of    the    Fifteenth    Amendment.    By    J.    M. 

MATHEWS.     75  cents ;  cloth  $1. 
VIII-XII.  England  and  the  French  Revolution,  1789-1797.     By  W.  T.  LAPRADE.     $1. 

TWENTY-EIGHTH  SERIES.— 1910— $3.50. 

(Complete  in  four  numbers.) 

I.  History  of  Reconstruction  in  Louisiana   (Through  1868).    Br  J.  R.  FICKLEN.     $1.00; 

cloth  $1.25. 

II.  The  Trade  Union  Label.     By  E.  R.  SPEDDEN.     50  cents ;  cloth  75  cents. 

III.  The  Doctrine  of  Non-Suability  of  the  State  in  the  United  States.     BY   K.   SINGH- 
WALD.     50  cents ;  cloth  75  cents. 

IV.  David  Ricardo:  A  Centenary  Estimate.     By  J.  H.  HOLLANDER.     $  1.00 ;  cloth  $1.25. 

TWENTY-NINTH  SERIES.— 1911— $3.50. 
(Complete  in  three  numbers.) 

I.  Maryland  Under  the  Commonwealth:  A  Chronicle  of  the  years  1649-1658.     By  B.  C. 

STEINEE.     $1 ;  cloth,  $1.25. 

II.  The  Dutch  Republic  and  the  American  Revolution.     By  FREDERICK  EDLER.     $1.50 ; 

cloth  $1.75. 

III.  The  Closed  Shop  in  American  Trade  Unions.     By  F.  T.  STOCKTON.    $1.00  ;  cloth  $1.25. 

The  set  of  twenty-nine  series  of  Studies  is  offered,  uniformly  bound  in 
cloth,  for  library  use  for  $103.00  net. 


NOTES  SUPPLEMENTARY  TO  THE  STUDIES  IN  HISTORY  AND  POLITICS. 

PRICE    OF    THESE    NOTES,    TEN    CENTS    EACH. 

Municipal  Government  in  England.     By  DR.   ALBERT  SHAW. 

Social  Work  in  Australia  and  London.     By  WILLIAM  GREY. 

Encouragement  of  Higher  Education.     By  Prof.  H.  B.  ADAMS. 

The  Problem  of  City  Government.     By  Hon.   SETH  Low. 

The  Libraries  of  Baltimore.     By  Dr.   P.   R.   UHLER. 

Work  Among  the  Workihgwomen  of  Baltimore.     By  Prof.  H.  B.  ADAMS. 

Charities:  The  Relation  of  the  State,  the  City,  and  the  Individual  to  Modern  Philan- 
thropic Work.  By  Dr.  A.  G.  WARNER. 

Law  and  History.     By  Dr.  WALTER  B.  SCAIFE. 

The  Needs  of  Self-Supporting  Women.     By  Miss  CLARA  DE  GRAFFENRBID. 

Early  Presbyterianism  in  Maryland.     By  Rev.  J.  W.   MC!LVAIN. 

The  Educational  Aspect  of  the  U.  S.  National  Museum.     By  Professor  O.  T.  MASON. 

University  Extension   and  the  University  of  the  Future.     By   RICHARD  G.   MOULTON. 

The  Philosophy  of  Education.     By  Dr.  WILLIAM  T.  HARRIS. 

Popular  Election  of  U.  S.  Senators.     By  JOHN  HAYNES. 

A  Memorial  of  Lucius  S.  Merriam.     By  J.  H.  HOLLANDER  and  others. 

Is  History  Past  Politics?    By  Professor  HERBERT  B.  ADAMS. 

Lay  Sermons.  By  AMOS  G.  WARNER  ;  with  a  biographical  sketch  by  GEORGE  E.  HOWARD. 
Price  twenty-five  cents. 

xii 


17 


DATE  DUE 


GAYLORD 


PRINTED  IN  U.S.A. 


,..U.P.?PUTH| 


A     nnn     '''"''' 


